Skip to main content

Full text of "Urbanization in France and Italy"

See other formats


;i^i 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2010 with funding from 

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 



http://www.archive.org/details/urbanizationinfr340nane 



Council of Planning Librarians exchange bibliography 



November 1972 



340 



URBANIZATION IN FRANCE AND ITALY 



Raffaella Nanetti 

Graduate Student, University of Michigan 



Mrs. Mary Vance, Editor 
Post Office Box 229 
Monticello, Illinois 61856 



THE LIBRARY OF THE 

MOVl 1972 

UNIVERSITY Of- ll-(JNOlS 
AT URBANA-CHAMP.-3r! 



CCUNCIL OF PLAMO\IG LIBRARIANS Exchange Bibliography ff3hO 

URB/\1IIZATI0N IN FRAl^CE J>M) ITALY 
by 



Raffaella Nanetti 
Graduate Student, 
University of Michigan. 



Introduction and Background Inforitiation 

I. Urban Development in Perspective 

An abundant literature exists in English on the historical 
development of urbanization in France and Italy. In particular, 
the Medieval and the Baroque city in Western Europe have been 
illustrated in their multiple content by ixell-knoim American 
scholars. Hoijever, the purpose here is to describe some general 
characteristics of urban development in France and Italy tihich are 
significantly different from urban development in the United States . 

Amos Rapoport in "Housing and Housing Density in France," 
ToT-m Planning ReviexT , January 1969, presents an interesting approach 
to distinguish between two traditions of settlements in the Western 
world J a. one in which the whole city is considered as the setting 
for life and where dwellings are merely more private parts of it 
and b. one xv'here the urban dxfelling is the total setting of life 
while the urban space is simply the connective tissue. The first 
urban tradition is identified as Latin-I^diterranean and the second 
as Anglo-American. More specifically, it is argued that in the 
history of French urban development there is evidence of the co- 
existence of both traditions. The "vernacular design" reflects 
directly the life and the activities of people (typical is the 
French street with shops, cafe's, etc.) whereas the "grand design" 
is more influenced by architectural theories and linked to royalty 
and the church and more abstract forms of public life. 

A similar point has been made for urban traditions in France 
and Italy by different scholars who illustrate it with a richness 
of information. The follCTjing is a list of the more inportant texts: 
F. Bacon, Design of Cities , (Neix York: Viking Press, 1960)5 L. 
Benevolo, The Origins of Modern Tcnm Planning , (Cairiridgo : KIT 
Press, 1971)1 L. Mumford, The Culture of Cities , (New York: Harco'ort, 
1966)1 H. Pirenne, Medieval Cities , (Princeton; Princeton University 
Press, 1952). From the characteristics of the Roman "law and order" 
city to the Medieval "freedom cf organic grcirth" city the historical 
concepts are by noij well known. The 19th century French "industrial 
tctms" have also been widely discussed in their grcv-rth pattern of 
industrial slums surrovinding the original commercial centers 
(Vittorio Ifezzucconi, "The New City of I-'iLlan, " Ekistics , April 1966, 
Bacon, I96O, Benevolo, 1971, I-iunford, 1966). 



2. CPL Exchange Eibliography /^3U0 

Less well known to American echolara but nevertheless cf great 
irportance in the development of city plar^ning novenents and urban 
legislation in France and Italy are the utcplan reformers. The 
several ccrununity and cooperative housing experiments prcnioted by 
them produced soraj of the first urban legislaticr experiences at 
the beginning of the 20th century (L. Benevolo, "Architect^Jre and 
Planning of Housing Estates," IF HP. 1968). 

Before France entered the industrial revolution in the sec cod 
half of the 19th century her urban network consisted of about liOO 
small tovms spread out through her territory ('Great Urbanizaticn 
Wave of Last Century, " IF HP, 1968) . Under the growth pressures of 
industrialization about twenty of then becane cities. In a 
relatively short time they multiplied their population five cr 
six fold, expanded their developed areas, and increased strip 
development along railroad lines. However, none of then ever 
reached outstanding dimensions. Their contained developnent was 
to a large extent a function of the restriction imposed en their 
potential grcvrth by the centralization in Paris of the national 
government, l.^ile some of them, far from Paris, developed ftxctlcne 
of regional capitals, the old provincial capitals merely established 
themselves as commercial centers to vfhich later were added r^gicnal 
administrative functions. Their major growth occurred before 1920 
and generally bet':een 1880 and 1910 when mass construction of 
industrial and working class districts took place. Subsequently, 
between the two world vrars, they experienced ver;'^ low demographic 
evolution. 

Even slOT-rer and often stationary was the growth of the urban 
network in Italy in the 19th century. Arcxind 1950 about 6C? of the 
work population uas still employed in agriculture. However, unlike 
France there existed already a large number of nedium-size cities, 
often capitals of the numerous states into which It^ly was fragrjented. 
Although most of them were not affected by the industrial revolution 
until well into the 20th century and m.ost of the Southern cities 
until after VIIVII, the urban network was characterized by a fairly 
homogeneous distribution of medium to large size cities, particularly 
in the North and Central portions of the couitry. On this premise 
it has been argued (Campos-Venuti, 1967) that the traura of ac- 
celerated xu"banization has produced and is producing conflicts by 
irposing an antithesis countrj'-side/city relatioiship with no tiae 
for problem-solving alternatives. 

The comparison between urban developnent characteristics in 
the United States and in Europe brings cut interest ing differences 
(U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Developnent, Urban Lard Policy, 
Washington, D.C: U. S. Gcvemnent ft-intinf. Office, 1?6?). ~ 

Obviously the age of the settlements is one, stretching over 2,CC0 
years in most inst^inces in France and Italj-. The pace of growth 
of their cities has been much slower in the last hxindred rears than 
has been the case in tlio United States i^ere cities often' spring 
up in a few years to very substantial dimensions due tc both in- 
migration and high rates of birth. Also, land has not been avail- 
able in equal abundance in the three countries. Italy and snaller 
countries in Europe have been faced for centuries with a 



Z 7^-^^ _, .- . 3. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

'^' ^ ' relatively fixed amount of land. The same is true to a lesser 

degree in France. Such contingent situations helped create land 
use control and land development policies, particularly in France 
and Northern countries together vxith a tendency of parsimony in the 
use of land. Moreover, while generally European urban dwellers have 
long been accustomed to city life, they have kept until recently a 
full appreciation for open space which stems from the tradition of 
close interdependence between city and country-side. A general 
characteristic of European cities is also the sense of human scale 
that they convey having been built before the automative age. 
Finally, they have a tradition of enphasis on aesthetic values and 
of creating pleasing urban environments. 



h. CPL Exchange BibliogTEphy #iUO 

II. The Concept of Centralized State 

The concept of centralized state is Irpcrtant to the urider- 
standing of the political and legal nfichanisra that are responsible 
for the initiiitive and the developnfint of urban policies and pro- 
grars. The concept is ccmcn to both Frarxe and Italy in its 
general terra although the profound differences in the political 
histories of the tv;o countries invest it with unique features in 
either case. Perhaps, for Ar.erican students, the ccr-cept of 
centralized state is better clarified when it is corpared \d.th the 
concept of federal state. Thiree basic characteristics identify 
the concept (Belorgey, Le Gcuvemenent et I'Adr.inistraticn de la 
France , Paris, 1968). Univerfornity principle — local gcvemr^nts 
(corumnes and provinces or de'partments ) are subject to respectively 
identical adninistrative regL'-.cs throughout the country*. Central- 
ization principle — by this principle the method of goverriing the 
country reserves to the central govemr^nt the right/duty to cake 
all of the substantive decisions that affect directly the life of 
the national coranunity, internal and foreign affairs. The apparatus 
of a centralized admin is tr at i en is in existence to irpler^nt the 
decisions of the central govemnent and to enforce the law. Unity 
principle — it identifies the existence of only one center of high- 
level decisions and of political stiimli \-:hich ccrrespcrds to the 
indivisible character of the state, and it is translated into the 
subordination to its law of every other public oerscn, adninistrative 
or governmental. The federal constitution pro\ides for the division 
of spheres of coirpetence between the Federal and the ner±>er states 
and also for mechanisms for the balance cf power anong them. Both 
France and Italy have novr institutionalised the regional level of 
government. However, while this approach recognizes a domain of 
competences to the region it is not a reserved dcnain — i.e., it 
does not imply political autcnoiTy. Rather, legislative actions 
taken by the region are subject to legal control by adjuinistrative 
and jviridical central authorities. Such control is the sar:e every- 
where in the state in accordance with the uniformity principle. 
Local govemmonts — i.e., provinces -departments and corrranes— do net 
have any power to initiate and pass legislaticn. The range of their 
functions and conpetences is defined and regulated by the struts. 



5» CPL Exchange Bibliography #3^0 

III. Historically Recognized State Development Functions 

The historical evolution of the concept of centralized state 
has reserved to the state the management of life in the national 
community (Belorgey, 1968), The centralization state in entering 
most aspects of the societal life has diversified its forms of 
intervention. However, they descend from basic functions which 
have long been recognized as belonging to the state. A key fxinction 
is the administrative function performed through the public service. 
In France it is called "function publique" or public function. The 
public service as a whole is the executive pca\rer of the state xirhich 
enforces the law (Antonio Scandura, Lo Sbato Moderno e la Fubblica 
Amministrazione , Rome: Stamperia Nazionale, 1962). The history of 
the Napoleonic governmental centralization is today translated in 
France into the highly bureaucratized, professionalized and largely 
autonomous civil service (Laxirence Mann and George Pillorge', 
'French Regional Planning, " JAIP, May 196U) . 

In Italy the public administration consists primarily of men 
whose juridical training leads them more toward considering formal 
problems of legitimacy than substantial problems of productivity 
(Joseph LaPalombara, Italy, the Politics of Planning: , Syracuse, 
New York: Syracuse University Press, 1966). However, in both 
countries there is a fairly strong feeling in favor of state control 
in that the state is not considered to be merely an arbiter of 
private interests or a manager of public services . It is assumed 
that the state is the custodian of the truth which is above in- 
dividual views and that it alone can promote the "general interest," 
a common welfare transcending individual or collective aspirations. 
This implicit belief in the omniscient authority of the Sever ign- 
State is certainly a legacy from the Roman Enpire and partly the 
results of Catholic traditions. In this perspective, institutions 
are not machinery erpirically operated to satisfy the requirements 
of life in society. Rather, they are allotted an intrinsic value 
and a kind of spiritual significance (Roger Gregoire, The French 
Civil Service, Brussels: Intern. Institute of Administrative 
Sciences, 196U). This in turn explains the nature of the civil 
service in France and Italy as a profession of its OTrin. It is a 
separate class, and as officials of the state, they are entitled 
to special statutory safeguards. 

This tradition gives to the state control of local govermnents 
because they are largely run by national civil servants of the 
prefectoral corps (Mark Kesselman, The Ambiguous Consensus , 
New York: Baopf, 1967). Thus, it is recognized as one of the 
state functions to operate for social distribution of development 
in the forms of revenue, income policies and policies of social 
change (Council of Europe, Social Aspects of Regional Development , 
StrausbTjurg: Council of Europe, 196?) . Also, it has been long 
established that the state has the responsibility for geographic 
distribution of development in the traditional forms of economic 
and physical planning. 



6. CPL Exchange BibUography #3U0 

In the early 19C0'8 there began to eoerge the political 
philosophy which recognized the reality of private gains at pwblic 
expense duo to the ccr^jletely free r^rket and the npply of in- 
frastnictures required of the state whenever and hcwever develcpnent 
occurred. Consequently, building upcn the traditicn of state inter- 
vention and under the pressure of various socialist novejcents, 
public investment policies became a coranon feature both in France 
and Italy as oconcmic stabilization policies at first and later as 
stiraula of high rates of economic growth (KUD, Urban Land Policy. 
V.ashington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1565). 

In this same traditicn the right of state cvnership of land 
is acknowledged, as well as a certain amount of public ccntrol 
of privately owned land. The postJ.wn period has witnessed a 
movement tc^rard a stronger assertion of the "general interest" 
and "public ccntrol" of the use of land to guide the rapid urban 
growth within a multifaceted national development policy fraae- 
work. As we vrill see there is a leg of about 15 years between 
the stage of promulgation and irplementaticn of sach national urban 
gTOT-rth policies in Prance and Italy (Lloyd Rodwin, I«aticns and 
Cities . Boston: Mifflin, 1570; Ruffolo-Barca, Progetto BO , 
Sausonn, 1571). 



7. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

Urbanization in France 

I. Patterns, Trends, and Problems: Social and Eccnomic Dis- 
equilibrium in France — The Paris Agglomeration 

Urban patterns and trends in post WII France and their im- 
pressive manifestations are the products of three major forces. 
The first is inherited from the recent past and consists of the 
up^^^ard demographic trend stimulated by the economic incentives of 
the 1$'39 national demographic policy. The policy was in response 
to the dramatically low demographic evolution ths^t France had 
experienced between the two wars. The second force is represented 
by the over -concentration of people and activities in Paris . The 
third is the economic revival that France experienced at the end of 
the war and which is related to the inplementation of strong economic 
measures aimed at modernizing the production apparatus of the society. 

Spurred by the dramatic events of the war and the issue of 
the vulnerability of Paris, concern about the high degree of 
concentration of population and econnmic activity in the Paris ^ 
region became general. Jean-Francois Gravier in Paris et le Desert 
Franc ais (Paris: Flammari'^n, 19h7) had faced the issue for the first 
time in a comprehensive fashion and generated wide popular support 
for his thesis. He illustrated the economic and social costs of 
the concentration in Paris of economic, financial, educational and 
transportation facilities and demonstrated the all -pervasive nature 
of this tradition. Consequently, he strongly recommended a de- 
centralization policy to favor the development of the provincial 
capitals. The effectiveness of his argument was based '^n eirple 
proof: a. the establishment of the centralized system occurred 
early in French history and was re-enforced by the nature of the 
industrial-technical revolution and b, the economic and social 
status of the provincial cities versus the capital was worsening. 

Figures for 19^2 published In A. M. Jeaner's "Planning Abroad^ " 
ToTrm and Country Planning , November 1965 show the skewed pattern 
of urban development in France. One city, Paris, had one-sixth 
of the country's total population (7,735*000) and one-fourth of 
the country's labor forcei cnly three agglomerations had more 
than 500,000 peoples fifteen others were in the 200,000-500,000 
class I twenty -three were in the 100, 000-200, OC^ range j 158 were 
located in the 200,000-100,000 range; U82 had between 5,000-20,000 
inhabitants; and as many as 685 had less than 5*000 people. 
The point being made was the impossibility of these small urban 
places to support good services and high standards of amenities. 
In turn, this re-enforced the pattern of the excdus to Paris of 
agricultural workers no longer needed in the fields. 

In 1967 Niles Hansen in French Regional Planning , (Blooraington, 
Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1967) presented evidence of the 
continuation of the trend t'lward concentration in the Paris region. 
Both in absolute terms and as prcportions of the total, the 
population of the region had increased. By then it represented 
one -fifth of the total with an average density of ca. 700 per square 
km. against a national average '^f 85. The central city itself with 
an average of 35,000 people per sq. km. is an indication of the 



8. CPL Exchange Bibliograplqr #3U0 

imbalance eocisting within the city itself. The aurr'Tunding suburbs 
had a density level of 9,000 people per sq. kn.. The grcvth rate of 
the Paris region for the period 1963-^5 was ©stiinated to be the 
highest ol the nation, approxL-atoly h.^% vifl-^a-vi8 the national 
average of 2.li/S. Housing figures indicate the persistssce of an 
economic concentration parallel to that of the population. In 
1962 the Paris region had 2d% ol the nation's skilled labor force, 
received 375^ of all the salaries distributed in France (naticnal 
average was 9,U66 ftrancs versus the 12,U52 in Paris), and acccjntec 
for 22/ of cvmed automobiles and 397 of phone subscriptions. The 
Paris area also received high levels of public expenditures . In 
196U this meant 2h^ of the national educational budget, 31? of 
the health vrelfare budget and 55 ^5? of the cultural affairs budget. 

Consequently, the Paris region was suffering frcn the '.rorst 
problens of urban congestion in the nation. Of the 3*2 nillioi 
dwellings in Paris, haK had been built before WI and only 16^ 
of this stock had been built after 19U3. test of the older 
dwelling units were lacking adequate sanitary and other facilities. 
Congested street conditions were an additional problem that was 
continuously aggravated by the increase in car OTTr.ership and b;.- 
the gracing number of business establishrjsnts in downtown Paris. 
Hansen reports that half of the population enployed in Paris 
lived outside of the city. The result was over two nillicn trips 
a day for the pccpie involved in going to and fron work. The 
consequences of urban congestion which resulted in nuch higher 
social costs per r^rginpl household as well as per marginal private 
vehicle were proven to be much felt by the population involved. 

If the grcirth of the Paris region is the dcninant feattre of 
the rapid urbanization trend of post-vrar France, a second sig- 
nificcint trend is the expansion of the general urban population. 
(See "The Evolution of the Urban Population in France" in UHP 
Urbanization and Planning in Prance , Brussels, 1968). V/hile 
the average annual growth of the urban population had been of ca. 
110,000 people bet\reen 1861 and 1920, it increased to ca. 160,000 
between 1921 and 19U6, to rg. U00,000 bet^'een 1917 and 195li and 
up to 51*0,000 people per year for 1955-^2. By then the French 
urban population represented 63/i' of the total on 6% of the country's 
territory with a density of 1,000 people per sq. kK. The rural 
population on 9lj^ of the land had a density of }h people per sc.. 
km.. Several factors explain this growth, including the steady 
decline of the active p'-pulaticn in agriculture, eccnonlc develop- 
ment, and the attractiveness of the Paris region. Perspectives 
of promotion and increased wealth have been found to be the rxDti- 
vating force for people to mo\'e to provincial cities and then to 
Paris, the latter move being acccrpanied by perspectives of pro- 
fessional and social pronotim (Guy Pcurcher, 'The Population of 
Paris," Ekisticks . Maj' 196U). 

Projections based on analysis of observed trends explain 
that urbanization forces will continue to operate in France for 
decades to come (IFHP, 1968). However, there are already indica- 
tions that urbaniraticai patterns night change scnewhat . Thus, 
while the population of the city of Paris is projected at eleven 



9. GPL Exchange Bibliography jC3U0 

million by 1985 such growth would not be as substantial as it 
has been in the recent past. Betxjeen 195U and 1962 the average 
groTiTth of the city of Paris has been less (l5.5^) than that of 
37 cities of a population of 100,000 and over {lS.S%). Demographic 
changes have to be explained quantitatively as x^ll as morpholo- 
gically. The latter dimmension indicates that the evolution of 
the structure of various areas of the city is under way. The 
centers are slowly but gradually loosing population to the benefit 
of peripheral districts, (CNRS, Crandis Villes et Petites Villes , 
Paris: CNRS, 1970). Once again Paris is the leading example. 
The city lost ca. 100,000 people between 195U and 1962 due to the 
growth of business in the heart of the city and the availability 
of individual transportation means which allowed people to find 
accomodations farther out. Forecasts of France's urban population 
set its percentage at 80 of the total by 1985. Most of this groirth 
will be in the form of spontaneous city gron-rth from existing 
urban areas through: a. the building of new housing and business 
\anits in the existing city texture and b. the building of units 
in concentric rings aroiind the periphery. Hoiirever, given the mag- 
nitude of the projected growth it is impossible for it to be 
absorbed by increases in the density and the dimension of existing 
cities. Consequently, new policy alternatives are being decided 
upon and implemented as will be seen later. 



10. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

II. Reconatructicjn After the War (I9li5-5U) . 

A. The Call for National Econcnic Planning- 

The ccranitricnt to planning in France has its roots in the 
anti-IIazi Resistance. The end of the '.rar and the saTifices that 
the liberation of the country had cost jncant the begirjiing of a 
new phase of French history. The new phase was to establish 
institutions which would giiarantee a yeater degree of social 
justice and brotherhood. Thus it appeared necessary to redis- 
tribute present and future wealth, and economic planning was 
identified as the most effective Instruinent for necessary" social 
and economic reorganization. Already before the end of the war 
in November 19hh, all directives of the IJaticnal Co'uncil of the 
Resistance spelled out the attributions of the >tinistry of Eccnonic 
Planning, among which is the elaboration of a develcpaient plan 
to be proposed to and approved by the cabinet (Pierre Corbel, 
Le Parlement Franca is et la Planif icaticn , Paris: Cujas, 1967). 

In January 19ii6 the Commissariat general du Plan, cr 
General Planning Commission, was created by a decree with Jean 
Monnet as the High Commissaire du Plan. The body was given the 
task of prep)aring and controlling the national plan. Cne of the 
successful goals of the plan was to reassure the U. S. gcvemnent 
that American aid would be used in accordance vrith the Blun-Bymes 
agreement. Hovrever, planning was positively accepted in France 
because of the nCT^/ly acquired avrareness by the French that: a. 
the technical transformations undenray in a modem society required 
forecasting and public commitment to new futures sind b. nev 
international realities were forming in Europe and in the world. 
In 19h7 with social, economic, and political transfcrnaticns 
\inder way, France created her first national plan structured 
around six basic economic sectors. (Pierre Bauchet , Ls Planificaticn 
Francaise, Paris: Editions du Sonit, 1962). 

French national planning was characterized by three major 
features. First, the implementation of the developnent plan did 
not bring about the creation of a super -bureaucracy. Pother, 
Monnet conceived the General Commission as a small but perr^nent 
technical body operating through a number of ad hoclj- created 
Modernization Commissions made up of representatives of the state 
administraticn, professions, trade unions, farmers unions and 
experts. Secondly, it was "indicative" planning. Conceived and 
carried through a capitalistic eccnoror, it was intended to 
orient both the nationalized and the private sectors of the econc;^- 
through incentives rather than constraints. Thirdly, national 
planning necessarily expanded the iiipcrtince of the public sectcry 
by way of increasing tho investments of public enterprises and 
favoring tl-«ra in the attribution of equipment contracts (Ccrbe, 1967). 



11. CPL Exchange Bibliography ]f'3U0 

The basic goal for the establishment of national planning 
was the reduction through collective decisions and implementation 
of social injustices. Social injustices were identified as the 
increasing inequalities being generated by rapid economic evolution 
in the labor, goods, and service markets in the form of abnormal 
prices and profits. Correspondingly, in this rapidly evolving 
society the exercise of individual freedoms was generally dependent 
on structures (economic and others) which were changing and, as a 
result, endangered individual freedoms. National planning as long- 
range collective decision-making redefined and guaranteed them for 
all (Claude Gruson, Qrigine et Espoirs de la Planif ication Francaise , 
Paris s Dunod, 1968) . 

The problem of eliminating social injustices presented a 
clear spatial dimension. Situations of economic and social dis- 
equilibriul characterized different regions and areas of France. 
However, in its first decade French planning was conceived 
and administered at only one level, the national one. Typical 
of this phase was the decentralization efforts for the region of 
Paris which consisted of dispersed and negative measures aimed at 
restricting the gro^.rbh of Paris . The first step was taken in 1950 
when the I'linister for Reconstruction and Urbanization called for 
rational spatial organization on a national scale. But up to 
19Bh the national planning experience was characterized by ini- 
tiatives too often scattered around and incomplete. It is only 
toward the end of 195U that a regional econoinic development 
policy approach takes shape for the purpose of replacing fragmen- 
tary with systematic technical and financial intervention (Hansen, 
1968). 



12. CPL Exchange BitUcgr&phy ii'ihp 

B. Urban Houainf, Problems t Early Policy Approaches ard Prograw 

The hoiising problem in France at the end of the vh" was 
due to man;- factors: a. the extensive war damage suffered by 
French cities, b. rent control policies ever a period of tiiue 
vrhich had aggravated the deterioration of pcTticns of the housing 
stock, c. the predisposition of all classes to pay ten percent of 
their income for housing, d. large nuirJbers of eccnonically weak 
families unable to bxiy or rent housing from the rarket, and e. 
socio-psycological problem consisting of the conr-only shared view 
of housing as a long-range investment beseiged by incertainties, 
(Rapoport, Amos, "Housing and Ho\ising Density lii France," Tom 
PLinnlng Review , January 1969) . 

Between 19U8 and 1950 the building permits issued in France 
vxere largely permits for the reconstruction of vrar dajnaged areas. 
Reconstructed dwellings represented h3'l% in 19U8, U9.UJ in 19U9 
and 37.6;;; in 1950 of total construction. V7ith the act of July 21, 
1950 instituting premiujis and loans for ccnstructicn, there vas a 
net-j demand for permits for dvrellings. Authorized construction 
jumped from 57,300 in 1950 to 100,000 in 1951 and continued to 
increase thereafter. If compared with housing construction in 
Germany, in 19U8 France and Germany had corpleted respectively 
10,000 and 150,000 dwelling units and in 1950 respectively 71,000 
and 366,000 units. The figures indicate a much sla^rer rate of 
housing construction in France with 1.6 di^rellings per 1,000 
inhabitants in 1950 as conpared with the 7.5 for Germany. 

In the first French national plan of 19U7-50 (later extended 
through 195U), the investment choices did not give adequate 
financial consideration to housing although it had been considered 
essential as a social and economic objective in other countries — 
e.g., Italy and Germany. The mcdest goal of 125,000 dwelling units 
fell short of being achieved. Quantitatively, total housing 
construction under the plan did not keep up with demographic 
increases. In 195li about 16?5 of housing construction was still 
in the form of reconstruction of war-damaged dwellings. 

Besides giving out reconstruction grants, state intervention 
in housing materialized through the irplementation of four differwit 
kinds of policies. The first policy consisted of a set of incen- 
tive measures designed to stimulate private housing ccnstructicn. 
The act of September 1, 19h8 was a social security measure by vhich 
the state gave to families eligible under social security criteria 
a monthly allocation to help them In buying the dwelling unit in 
which they lived. The unit had to meet certain ninirain standards, 
particularly in terns of health and density ccsiditions. The rate 
of the allowance was to be determined on consideraticns of inccne 
and niurbGr of children of the applicants, '■.'hile the sccpe of this 
first measure was quite linited, the act of July 21, 1?50 was 
broader in scope. It instituted for private individuals the 
system of construction bonuses for a maxirun of 20 and of special 



13. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

loans. The former were to be annually decided upon by the state 
and the latter were to be decided upon by the French Land Credit 
Institute (Credit Foncier de France) . Under certain conditions 
the combination of the txjo types of state aids would cover up to 
"JOfo of the estimated housing cost. The loans could be repayed 
in a 25 year period at a 6.8^' interest rate which reduced to ^% 
for medium term loans. The scope of these measures x^ras to encourage 
private housing construction and not simply to give access to 
housing ownership. The positive effects of these incentive measures 
was quite direct as the previously given figures en housing con- 
struction in 19^0 and 1951 showed. Hoirever, the land Credit 
Institute soon became incapable of financing all credits by itself. 
The Bank of France had to virtually guarantee most of these special 
credits, 90^ of them in 1953 and 83^ in 195i|j which by then put 
into question the whole system. (Francoise iVlarnata, Financement et 
Delais de la Construction , Paris: Colin, 1970). 

The second houing policy that the state adopted was direct 
intervention into housing construction. The state assumed upon 
itself the bulk of the financing of low-rent housing, or habita- 
tions 'a loyer mode're'. The existing H.L.M. have replaced the 
H.B.M., or low-cost housing or habitations a bon marche''. The latter 
mark the state's intervention in low-cost housing which dates back 
to 189U. Legislation passed at that time provided for fiscal 
exemptions for housing for Ict'T-income families . Later, in 1906 
loT-r-cost housing X'jas made compulsory in every department or county 
jurisdiction. A further step was taken in 1928 xirith the Loucheur 
Act which fixed the minimum number of low -cost housing to be built 
annually. The H.L.M. of post WII times includes offices which 
act under public lax-r, cooperatives, acting under private law and 
private companies, created by employers to build rented dwellings 
for their employees. It also established real estate credit in- 
stitutions, socie'tes de credit immobilier, for loans to individuals 
who want to buy low -cost dviellings. 

All these diverse non-profit units are under direct state 
control for the distribution of credit. However, the construction 
of H.L.M. are largely financed by the state through long terms, 
30 to 50 year loans at reduced interest rates. The minimum amount 
of such loans is revised every four years by a frame-act or 
comprehensive legislation. Although the scope of H.L.M. is the 
construction of low-rent dwellings, the same types of dwellings 
may be built to be sold. In the latter case a down payment is 
necessary, and 25 year term loans are available at h»$% interest 
rates (Belorgey, 1968). 

The third type of housing policy did not have incentive 
measures for the sector of private housing construction or 
direct state intervention. Rather, it was the policy which made 
it compulsory for employers to contribute to housing construction. 
Basically, the act of July 11, 1953 created a source of housing 
finance by requiring industrial and commercial employers en^iloying 
at least ten workers to contribute 1% of all gross salaries payed 
out each year to housing construction. Such funds were to be payed 
to H.L.M. for other forms of house financing. 



lii. CPL Exchange Bibliography jj(3liO 

The fourth type of housing policy was in the fern of tax 
relief devices, ffevr dwellings vrere exerpted fron paying property 
taxes for a twenty year period fron their construction. Also, 
the buyers of ncnt direllinga co'ild deduct fron their incorA tax 
the interests on the loans vrhich they took to buy their dwellings. 

State investment in housing dropped during the decade under 
consideration. Public funds invested in housing anounted to 6^5? 
of total investment in housing but drcpped to Ul^ in 1552 and 
to 27a in 1956. The sane trend has been noticed in several 
European countries, incliiding Italy (Mamata, 1970). 

The development form which characterized most of the sccial 
housing built through H.L.M. bodies was that of the "grands enseribles" 
or large-scale housing develcpnents. They are particularly 
characteristic of the Paris region. Designed by private architects, 
they v/ere built in vacant areas surrounding the city. They consist 
of high-rise buildings separated by large areas of open space. 
Densities are very high, approxiirately 28.5 to 57 dwelling units 
per acre. One of the reasons for such densities was, of course, 
land costs and the constraint on planners not to exceed the 
limits of rentability. Another reason has been argued to be thp 
negative attitude of French planners toward single-fanily hc\ises 
in the tradition of Le Corbusier. Typically, most dwelling units 
in the ensembles have three rooms, a number are four rocn 
apartments, and five and two room apartments make up about lOJt of 
the total number of units. The height of the ensembles increases the 
number of people moving from the center of Paris. The height 
of buildings is controlled in Paris, and the ratio of height- 
to-open-space can be maintained with higher buildings in the 
peripheral areas (Rapaport, 1969). 

The development of industrialized building techniques stinolated 
by go\'emmental research had its share of responsibility in the 
construction of the grand ensembles (Eric G. Ha-;es , "Hcus ing in 
Britain, France, and V.'est Germany," Ekistiks , I'^rch 1966). 
Hwever, the ensembles depart from the French urban tradition of 
small, compact, non-green spaces v?ith shops, cafes sr.d persons lized 
services. The ensembles do not rely en mixed land use and lack, 
therefore, the quality of animation possessed by older French tcvns. 
Feelings of isolation from older towns and of personal loneliness 
have been expressed by inhabitants of the ensembles in several 
surveys taken to meaGure the quality of life in the ensertles 
(CNRS, Grades Villos ot Pet it ps Villcs . Paris: O.TIS, l^^"":) . 



15. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

C. Planning Legislation and Instruments 

In 19li5 after the war, the nen state Urban Planning Services 
(UPS) gave top priority to the reconstruction of war dainages. 
This helped the UPS to perfect their doctrine, to try their 
methods and to perfect their legal arsenal in tackling the pro- 
blems posed by the urban areas undamaged during the war. Later 
on, toward 1950, the experience led them to strongly recommend the 
establishment of "l^ational Territorial Planning" to orient the 
regional and local plans. Some years before, UPS had acquired a 
new concern: the necessity of organizing the laison betx^reen the 
urbanization plans and the programs for urban facilities drairm up 
by the General Commissioner of the Plan. However, territorial 
planning legislation and programs were to be instituted in the 
future . 

A reconstruction and organization plan was draxm up for each 
of the 2,000 places partially or totally destroyed during the war. 
The x^ork was to be done at the expense of the state as part of 
the repair of war damages. Reconstruction planning was a theore- 
tical and practical training school for the new UPS and a proving 
ground for the performance of urban planning operations . The 
development of a large number of administrative practices was, 
in fact, often facilitated hj the experience gained in rehabilit- 
ation. The realization of "urban property regrouping" covering 
a very large number of lots familiarized the UPS X'Tith the art of 
dealing xrith associations of ovmers and Tiri.th expropriation 
formalities . 

Supervision of reconstruction plans facilitated the assignment 
of the means (hximan and material) required by the issue of building 
permits and xirban planning certificates (Belorgey, I968). The 
clauses of the organization plans and the rules of the building 
regulations were also tested in this occasion. In the same way, 
the construction of road and other netxirorks profited greatly from 
the rehabilitation experience. However, certain regulatory aspects 
of the reconstruction of towns xirere subject to some degree of 
criticism. The War Dam.age Law had laid down the principle of 
"identical reconstruction" of the property destroyed, the only 
reservation being improvements arising out of sanitary regulations. 
Consequently, major modifications of the urban structxire were 
implicitly condemned, and, xinder these conditions, it is fortxmate 
that in several instances coirplete regrouping of property parcelling 
was achieved. 

The state administration of urbanization has its roots in the 
June 15, 191*3 lirban planning act. The law modified the former 
texts xifithout changing their substance very much. Nevertheless, 
it proved innovative by: legalizing the notion of "urban planning 
grouping" for the overall study of a certain number of toxmships 
with common interests, rendering mandatory building permits, and, 
finally, creating imder the Directorate of Urban Planning "Regional 
Urban Planning Districts" whose officials were to proceed at the 
state's expense with the preparation of local and regional tct-m 



16. CPL Exchange BibUogr&phy i^3U0 

planniiiL' The regional approach for organization plana had been 
put forward aa early as 1932 for the Paris area, but the unvrieldly 
administrative jnanafecment of the urban planning groups — in parti- 
cular the necessity to obtain the ayreerent of the nunicipal 
authorities of all the tcwns covered by the group — prevented rsny 
of then fron being instituted. V'ith the accelerated irrdgraMm 
from the country-side, the danger of population iribalance betveen 
cities and tarns and the correlative inequalities in their eccnordc 
development of their regions became mere acute. 

Under the 19U3 Act the "organization project" of a nunicipal 
territory (or of an urban plarjiing group) ccr^isted of tvo cceple- 
nentary documents: the Plan itself (based en topography) and the 
organization program. The latter vras a written doc'J-nent which 
intended to regulate the application of instructions laid down in 
the plan, notably with respect to the occupation of lar^ by con- 
struction. This concept was valid if it could be assured that nest 
of the operations provided for could be perforned quite rapidly. 
It proved effective enough in the period of reconstruction of 
damaged tOirnsj but the concept appeared open to criticisn ^en it 
applied to organization projects in towns which had not been 
damaged, and which were expanding with the aid of private enterprise. 
Cn the other hand, the developr.ent of the house building progrars 
resulted in the rapid expansion of urbanization, both cn areas 
T7hich had been provided with infrastructures as well as over rural 
areas. This necessitated revisions of the schene with all of the 
administrative procedures that it curtailed. Hence, in 1952 
consideration was first given to amendments of the law so as to 
make it possible to establish the broad outlines of future planning 
without constraining the whole area to specific plarjiin^ regulaticns 
V7hich were not applicable. However, distinction between naster plp.n 
and detailed urbanization plans was only later legalized. 

Finally, mention must be made of the Land Act of August 6, 
1953 which permitted expropriation for public purposes of land 
intended to be assigned to hoxise builders, be they persons cr 
corporations. Such nveasures were intended to be used tc provide 
for land for community and other public facilities in the face of 
the increasingly severe shortage of land, particularly in large 
urban areas . 



17. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

III. The Emergence of Regional Approaches to Urban Development 
(l955-61i). 

One of the goals of the Second Plan xiras the correction of 
very obvious regional inequalities. From the beginning of the 
1950 's, the increasing awareness of the disequilibrium in the 
geographical allocation of development produced the two milestones 
of the spatial organization (amenagement) policies: the revi- 
talization of the regions and iirgprovement in the organization of 
metropolitan Paris. Although imbalanced distribution of devel- 
opment was not a new phenomenon, it had been accellerated by the 
post -war recoveiy, and had created difficult situations. In the 
central and western regions there were areas suffering from the 
consequences of certain economic difficulties — e.g., ports and 
shipyards — as well as a decline relative to areas of expansion. 
Many times, these areas of expansion were the result of specific 
political choices. For example, Marseille was in this category 
due to decline in iirportance of the Mediterranean vis -e -vis the 
EEC core. At the same time, in these underdeveloped regions 
there were concentrations of development (e.g., Grenoble and 
Besancon in the South) which had growth rates higher than those of 
Paris . In the traditionally more prosperous regions of the North 
and North- Ep.st, provisions for the modernization of private and 
public capital equipment as well as changes in activities were 
made to meet the competition of other European centers of pro- 
duction. 

A. Revitalization of Regions 

Policy measures aimed at limiting the overconcentraticn of 
economic activity in the Paris region and the encouragement of 
grOTirth in other regions were taken in Parliament in 1955 • The 
decree of January 5, 1955 tried to impose controls on the location 
of private industry around Paris . Ch December 31* 1958 another 
decree was added which coi trolled the expansion and renting of ;• 
buildings for industrial purposes. The law of August 2, I960 
provided funds for the conversion of buildings for public purposes. 
HoT-rever, these and other policies were criticized for not solving 
the problem of the congestion of Paris but only moving it to the 
periphery. 

More direct were the series of parallel policy measures designed 
as positive incentives for the revitalization of depressed regions. 
Starting in June 1955 there were created by decree Regional - 
Development Corporations (SDR's). These uere stock conpanies 
financed by commercial banks and public financial institutions 
whose aim was to finance industrial enterprises in regions with 
uneirployment. Fifteen of them were set up armed with a series of 
legal advantages. Despite these advantages, the major problem 
with the SDR's has been its lack of success in raising capital. 
A second major problem has been the poor coordination of SDR 
financing with the planning of the twenty -two regions that were 
defined by the Order of November 28, 1956. 



18. CPL Ezchp-nge Bibliogr&phy #3llD 

The general policy of regicivilization of French planr.ir.g 
was an effort to rocrganize and h-tinricnize the rany adnir.istr5.tive 
structures of the nmreroua govenunent agencies, as well as to 
serve as decentralization neasures . France's traditional systen 
of administration v/cs in fact en obstacle to effective re^cnal 
planning. It's vertical and hierarchical structxrres caisisted of 
ministries with admin is traticr.s centered in Paris. The connection 
with the provinces was subject to the control of the prefect 
(appointed by the center) vrho had local authority and was responsible 
for coordination, Hcvever, coordination was particxilarly non- 
existent at the provincial and local level (Kesselnan, M., The 
Ambiguous Consen'^us , New York: Knoff, 1967 and La Documentation 
Franscaise, L'Hsrr.onisation dec Circcrscripticr.s Adrinistratives 
Franscaises , Paris : GIB 1962 and Institude Ilational de le 
Statistique et des Etudes Economiques, Villes et Crgeonersticns 
Urbaines , Paris, 1962). 

A series of steps were undertaken with the decree of June 2, 
i960 which brought the definition of tv:enty-one regional prcgrans 
and a series of coordination measures. Sor.e thirty adninistrative 
districts were required to change their bcxmdaries to coincide 
with those of the regions. A prefect was appointed to coordinate 
the activities in each region. His role was to organize and 
preside over interdepartmental conferences vrhich were to study 
and coordinate plans and programs for the social and ecoiordc 
development of the region (Hansen, 1968). However, these neasures 
fell short of the goal of effective regional planning. Respcn- 
sabilities for executing regional policies viere still poorly de- 
fined especially in regard to the goals of the third national plan, 
1958-61. In addition, the newly defined regions lacked adequate 
staff and resources to devote to long-term studies of prcblCi-as and 
alternatives for development. It appeared evident in the early 1960's 
that effective area planning could be realized only within the frane- 
work of the national plan. The Fourth Flan, 1962-tS, represents 
the first plan to define coherent regional policies for all 
regions within the national guideline? (lUles Hansen, 'Trench 
National Planning Experience", J A IP , November 1?6?) . Substantial 
changes were adopted in the forrnilaticn of regional cbj<?ctives 
and in the preparation and revier^ing of local plans (Lloj-d Rodwin, 
Hnticns and Ci^ ies , Boston: ItLfflin, 1970, and La Dccunentation 
Franscaise, L'Aruemaperuent du Territoire , Paris: GIB: IftL). 

The comprehensive approach to regional planning revolved 
arotird the concept of land development policies. The policies 
^rere designed to control land uses in both rural and urbanizing 
arnas . In rural areas where agricultural holdings were tec small, 
fragmented, statutory organizations called Land hlanagenent and 
Rural Development Corporations (SAFER) were set up in 19tO. The 
SAFER 's were conpanies acting under private law but at the same 
time enjoying advantages of ccrpcraticrs for "public purpose." 



19. CPL Exchange Bibliography 7'/3l;0 

They had the power to: 1. intervene on the market betxreen buyer 
and seller; 2. use their right of preniption to buy land at fair 
prices and reapportion the acquired land. (F. J. K\irfitt, "Mo- 
bilizing the Hectares in France, " Town and Country Planning , 
Septeirber 1^65). The much bigger problems of land speculation and 
housing shortage in urbanizing areas xrere also seriously faced in 
the late 1950 's with a number of interesting measures. Most 
important of all were the establishment of Priority Development 
Zones (ZUP's). 

The ZUP's were instituted by Decree 58-li;61| of December 31? 
19^8 which was reinforced by the circular of September 2$, 1959 
of the Ministry of Construction. The primary objective of the ZUP 
was to prevent sprawl development on land by creating facilities and 
services and to prevent development on land not adequately equipped, 
thus forcing communes to provide them. Other objectives of the ZUP 
were: 1. administratively, to provide a unity of action x-rithin a 
zone when its boundaries included more than one commune j 2. tech- 
nically, to entrust only one agent with the responsibility of 
providing the community facilities and services | 3. financially, 
to elaborate one financial plan with the participation of all 
agencies and groups interested in the allocations j and h* socially, 
to provide for a planned living environment equipped with all 
community facilities and services necessary to qualify it as a 
good urban environment (j , Jamois, Les ZUP , Paris: Berger-Levrault, 
1968). 

ZUP's are z'' iies of concerted xirbanization, a type of housing 
zone whose goal is to provide simultaneously housing and all of 
the other facilities for collective living. A ZUP can be created 
by decree by the Ministry of Construction at the request of a 
commune or by decree of the Council of State. The development of 
the ZUP is then entrusted to a special development corporation 
(Henry ¥. Ehrmann, Politics in France , Boston; Little, Broxm, 1968). 
Fifty percent of the capital for the ZUP comes from the local 
authorities, 30-UOfo from public finance institutions and the rest 
from private sources. All new construction is financed by the state. 
A ZUP has to plan for more than one hundred dwelling xmits. Cnce 
a ZUP is created by decree the local authorities have the riyit 
of preemption for foiar years. This right is similar to eminent 
domain. If within the four year period no agreement has been 
reached betxjeen the development corporation and the owner of the 
land, the former can expropriate. The simplified forms of financing 
the ZUP are also interesting ( Jamois, 1968). The ZUP's were 
technically quite innovative and potentially a powerful urban 
development technique, but they suffered from the lack of strict 
interministrial cooperation and commitments on subsidies (David 
Kinsey, "The French ZUP : Technique of Urban Development, " JAIP , 
November 1969). 

If the ZUP technique was to affect land speculation and housing 
in urbanizing areas, the national urban renevjal program instituted 
by decrees of the Ministry of Construction in 1958-59 had as one 
of its directives to retain the urban character of French cities — 
i.e., the diversification of uses. (Amos Rapoport, "Some Aspects 
of Urban Renei-jal in France," Totto Planning Review, October 1966), 



20. CPL Exchange BibUography #3U0 

(Robert Davenport, "Urban Renewal in Capital Cities of Western 
Europe," Planninr; , 1571), and (Loo Grebler, "Drben Renewal in 
European Coxintries," JAIP , Uaverber 1962). Th,e approach in the 
French legislation v;a3 once a^atn that of creating special 
bodies for urban renovral projects: Urban Renewal Corpcraticns (SCR's). 
Vfhen the projects are declared of public trrpcrtance they receive 
governmental funding with no requirenent of ratching f'jnds fron 
local government. Similar to the case of the ZUP's, the SCR's 
were given the right to ccndem prcperty. The owner had priority 
to participate in the redevelcpr.ont projects if he chose (Leo 
Grebler, "National Prograros for Urban Renewal in Europe," LarA 
Econonics , November 1962). 

B. Uev Organization of the Paris Metropolis 

The reorganization of the Paris region was undertaken as the 
irajor effort within the cor^rehensive regional frarcewcrk proposed 
in the late 1950 's. The policy of disincentives aiir^d at res- 
training grcirth in the region vras superceded by the nwre con- 
prehensive measures proposed in the Coirprehensive Plan for the 
Development of the Paris Region (PADCG), the IpfcO regicnal pl^n* 
PADOG was approved en August 6, I960. It was the result of the 
T/ork of the government appointed commission which in 1559 recom- 
mended the creation of the Paris district of the Paris area and 
three surro\inding departments (Belorgey, 1968). The Comission 
was directly responsible to the .'Jinistry of Construction. The 
Plan proposed to control the chaotic peripheral developnent of 
Paris by blocking the possibility of imnigraticn, thus ILniting 
the physical growth of the city. V/hile rejecting the possibility 
of creating new towns around Paris (thereby attracting ncre people 
to the area), the Plan proposed the alternative of changing Paris 
from her mononuclear form to a polycentric city. Such an approach 
consisted in the careful planning of strategic poles in the suburban 
ring to be developed into urban nuclei which would be autcncncus 
from the historic center of affairs (George S. Shcrt, "The Parisian 
Agglomeration," Toim and Country Flrjminf: . July 196I). The P;J)0G 
identified three possible poles of dcvclcpr.ent (Peter Hall, The 
World Cities . Kct* York: I-fcGraw-Hill, 196b). 

The year after the adoption of PADOG the Paris district vas 
created by decree and a f.eneral delegate vas placed under the 
direct dependence of, the Prime Minister. La DocunGntaticn Frenscaise 

Crpanisnticn ot Arnc-n." ^-^ do la Rccion dc Paris (Paris: CE, 1962) 

The adrinistr.it i\-c re \ticn cliriii.-tcd 5 variety of overlaps In 

administration and proviueu fcr the consolidation of economic prcblers 
and development techniques, as well as a unity of ccncepticn and 
inpulsG functions. Specifically', the district xnss to studj- develop- 
ment problems --e.g., public facilities, nsnagenent of enterprises of 
public interest, and inpositicn of a regicnal tax for development. 
The district coordinated the action of all territorial adminis- 
trations and collaborated with different ministries, but it was also 
to supervise them in their operaticns with the district (Belcreey, 
1968). 



: 21. CPL Exchange Bibliography />3U0 

IV. The Fifth Plan: National Urban Land Development Policies 
(1965-70). 

T'ith the Fifth Plan a new dimension was added to French 
national planning. The Fifth Plan included the urban dimension 
besides the economic and physical ones which had characterized 
the previous plan (Kerever, "City Planning in France," in I.V.L.A. 
U rbanization in Developing Countries , The Hague: Wijhoff, 1968). 
Specific urban development policies were chosen, programs and tech- 
niques were defined, and the national budget "regionalized" according 
to policy choices. The Plan proposals, hor-iever, xrere not radically 
new. Rather, they were the definition of the goals of balanced 
regional development that had been vaguely articulated in the 
Fourth Plan (Rodtrin, 1970). The first report on the Plan spaced 
projections of the Plan up to 198^ and identified three basic 
tendencies upon xirhich the Plan choices were to be made. Economic 
growth and urban concentration trends were projected to continue as 
well as the trend tovrard the opening of national frontiers in Europe 
as a result of the EEC. Cne of the key elements of the urban 
strategy of the Plan xx^as the proposed modernization of Paris and 
the development of the Paris Basin. 

A critical view of the poor results provided by the PADCG in 
controlling the growth of Paris had demonstrated that its assuup- 
tions of limiting migration into Paris was unfounded. The Fifth 
Plan, therefore, projected this hypothesis and proposed the re- 
organization of the Paris Basin through the development of new towns 
and called for the formation of land reserves (Derek Hughes, 
"Pontoise: A Nei^r Tox-m for Paris," Tox^m and Country Planning , May 
1969) . A second key element of the Plan vxas the urban hierarchy 
proposal. It consisted of a planned and comprehensive approach 
to the reorganization and development of the urban structure of 
the country. The proposal included: 1. the development of balanced 
metropolises to equalize the attractiveness of the Paris region, 
2. the identification of a multi-level provincial urban structure. 
The metropolis constituted the highest level of the hierarchy. The 
intermediate level xras constituted by four groups of cities among 
Tjhich iTere ten "regional centers" and twenty-four cities with 
incomplete regional functions. Finally, the basis of the hierarchy 
consisted of tox-ms and rural centers xirhich xirere undergoing a process 
of transformation in their rural life and x-rhich consequently changed 
in their physical and functional structures. The studies xihich 
provided the gro\md for such a system of classification utilized 
txTO main criteria for deciding xipon the influence of a city: 
the intensity and the rarity of the fxinctions performed in relation 
to the total population and eirjiloyment in certain actixn.ties 
(Hansen, I967). 

The same functional criteria and others xjere enployed by the 
Plan for the proposed nex-r towns. Nex-T toxms x-rere proposed in 
regions adjacent to the Paris Basis as x-rell as in other regions in 
relation to some of the proposed balanced metropolises. The formier 
case in particular expressed one of the concerns of the French and 
European xirban tradition of old tox-ms nurtxjring the new. Technically, 
the concern of the Plan was translated into the planning concept 



22. CPL Exchange Bibliography i^'3U0 

of "parallel tovma " (ohadrach Wooda, "Le y±raie: A Hetr <>aarter 
for the City of Touloioae, " Washinpicn University Lavf Q-uarterly, 
February 1565); (Jaques Riband. •'Vivr; lea Villes iicuvelles, "' Tcr.m 
and Countr:/- PLirning, /iay 19^5); (Derek Hughes, "Ilew Towns in 
Fronce," iCT-.m and Country Planning , July 1963); Ancnynoua, ^ 
"Operatint: Firmiry-Vort, " F.kiEtics , H.66) and (Ailland-Vedres, 
"Cite' de I'Abrcuvoir, Bobiyny," -''21> '^°* 7^^* -^ ^''^^ cases 
their objectives were to open no to urbanization and to 

reintegrate the urban life elements missing in the suburban 
development characterized by the residential grand enserl^les, 
(FNSP, L 'Experience Franscaisc des Villes, Ucuvelles , Paris, 1970), 
and more recently by larce-scalo urban villages in the American 
stylo (Jlargarot Osborne, 'The Frenchman's Home," Tcr-'n and Country 
Planning , July 1967) and (Anonymous, "Levitt-tCTms for France," 
Trr-n and Country Planning , April 1965). The nevr tcvns were to be 
managed by public bodies (nixed economic corporations) created by 
the State Council that would have the majority of the capital. 
They vrere to have a legal personality, financial autcnony, and 
provide for tho equal representation of local ccnnunities and 
government in their administrative councils (FIJSP, 1970). 

Implicit in the urban development proposals of the Fifth Flan 
vras the goal of controlled urban land use. 7ith regards to this 
goal the inplication was a substantial innovaticn in legislation 
for controlling rising land prices and facilitating planning 
operations (J . Ripert, 'The Lnplementaticn of the French Plans," 
Ekistics , May 1967). Several measures were taken to ccntrol 
land prices including: a. siirplified and irider application of the 
ZUP and ZAD (Zones of Differed Planned Development) techniques by 
granting the state pre-emption rights without the advice of local 
communities, b. the institution of ii tax on the right to build 
(a tax calculated so that if the building volvime ■vas over the CC6- 
building density coefficient — the builder payed to the local city 
905b of the value of the land which should have been used), and 
c. the institution of a tax on use change-nutst ion (Belcnfey, 
1968) . 

Legislative innovations to facilitate planning operations 
were introduced by the Land Use Act of December 30, 1970. The 
Act required the local and area-vride planning authorities to 
prepare: 1. a General Development and Planning Scherie (SDAV) 
which vras a long-term sketch plan required for any area of planning 
cor '; 2. a Land Use Plan (POS) vrhich defined private owner's 

dov. ;.t rit^its and coitrolled local spatial expansion by five 

year increments, and 3^ continuing urban studies to be kept xip to 
date for planning opornticns (Jacques Dreyfus, "French Urban 
Studies," JAir, Movrmbcr 1969). 

Notuithslnnding these and other logislatire efforts, the 
problem with tho impressive \irban dewloprx-nt strategj' presented 
bj' the Fifth Plan ims one of implenentaticn! tine for execution and 
political and financial expenses. The tasks have been inherited 
by the Sixth National Plan (l?7o-75) which for the Faris region and 
the metropolises has proposed a new administrative unit connected 



23. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

with the Prime Minister's office. The development of land use 
policies for them xrould involve the supreme authority (Prime Mnister); 
experts, local authorities, and groups of citizens to make them 
suceed (Jerome Moned, "Paris Metropolitan Plan, " Ekistics , October 
1967) and (lerome Moned, "Management of Transportation Systems," 
Ekistics, October 1970). 



'. C'^"'":?' 



2li. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

APPEllDK A 

Chronological Sumnary of Land Development Lcgislaticn 
1. France 

1. Urban Planning Lair of June 15> 19l3 ccdifidng and corpletlng 
the previous texts on planning projects and creating the State 
Urban Planning Services (Central adninistraticn in the General 
Dole£,aticn for National Facilities). 

2. Creation of the I^inistry of Reconstruction and Urban Planning 
(I9lili) v;hich regrouped under the direction H. Raoul Dautry the 
services of the General Delegation for National Facilities and 
those of the Coimissariat for Property Reconstruction-installa- 
tion of the Directorate of Urban Planning and Housing. 

3. Decree of Jvine 21, 19U5 relating to reconstruction and plaming 
projects for the damaged tcvms . 

h. Decree of October 27, 19U5 en building permits. 

5. Lau of October 28, 19U6 on the reconstructicn of property 
destroyed by acts of vrar. 

6. Abolition of the urban planning districts and creation of the 
departmental services of urban planning and cor-s true ti. en, 19ii6. 

7. Creation in 19U6 of the Connissariat-General fcr the Plan for 
Modernization and Facilities, the first Goraiissioner being 
Vt. Jean llonnet. 

8. The Ministry of Reconstructicn and Urban Planning \£S entrusted 
in 19h7 vrith the lo\7 rent drrellings (K.B.M.), irfiich becane the 
moderate rent dwellings (H.L.M.) a few years later. 

9. Tn I9I49 the Directorate of Urban Planning and Housing changed 
its name to Directorate of Territorial Planning. 

10. In 195to the Minister of Reconstruction and Urban Planning infcrraed 
the Council of Ministers in February of the necessity to establish 
a National Territorial Planning PrograrrK . 

11. Decree of Au^-iust 8, 1?50 creatine the National Fund fcr Territorial 
Planning, intended to facilitate the financing cf the realiza- 
tion of residential and industrial areas. 

12. Law of July 21, 1950 known as the Courant Iav on assistance to 
builders (organization of a system of special bcnuses and leans), 
institution of standardized direlling plans. 

13. Law of Kay 2li, 1951 providing for the creation of public estab- 
]— '-- --.tc of serl-private companies for the realization of 

r . I planning. 



25. CPL Exchange Bibliography ii3hO 

Hi. Institution in 1951 of the Planning Committee of the Durance 
area (affected by the creation of the Serre-Poncon dam) and 
the Planning Committee of the Bas -Rhone -Languedoc. 

15. Lan of August 6, 1953 knoxm as the Land Law, authorizing expro- 
priation for the construction of groups of dwellings and indus- 
trial areas . 

16. Decree of June k, 195U relating to defective subdivisions 
(State aid for their reorganization). 

17. In 19Sh the legal texts concerning urban planning, housing, 
construction and accommodation t:ere regrouped in a Code of 
Urban Planning and Housing. 

18. April 2, 1955: creation of the post of Commissioner for the 
National Planning Company for the Bac-Rhbne-Languedoc . 

19. m.y 20, 1955: creation of the pest of Commissioner for Building 
and Planning for the Paris Region. 

20. June 30, 1955: decrees relating to the drafting of Regional 
Action Programmes sponsored by the Commissariat-General for the 
Plan and instituting a decentralizing committee. 

21. October 22, 1955: decree enacting the National Building 
Regulations . 

22. Law of August 7, 1957 tending to encourage the construction of 
dwellings and community facilities and ruling on the drafting 
of plans for modernization and urban facilities for large 

urban areas, as well as the harmonization of the regional economic 
action programmes and regional planning projects . 

23. Creating in 1957 of the High Council for Territorial Planning. 

2k. Decree of October 23, 1958 unifying the legislation on 
expropriation. 

25. Decrees of December 31, 1958 relating to: a. master and detailed 
urban planning projects, b. subdivisions, c. priority urbani- 
zation zones, d. urban renovation, e. syndicates of w-jners for 
the purpose of carrying out urban planning, and f . operations 
(urban replotting, etc.,) in the Paris area. 

26. Decree of January 5, 1959, n. 59-30, on the "Urban District"— 
i.e., public person grouping communes belonging to the same 
urban agglomeration. 

27. Decree of January 9, I960 creating the High Council of the 
I'linistry of Construction (v:hich replaces the High Council for 
Territorial Planning) . 

28. In i960 General Instructions of April 8th on urban planning 
projects. 

29. Decree of August 6, I96O approving the General Plan for the Paris 
Region (PADCG) . 



?6. CPL rochange Bibliography #3U) 

30. Cctcbor 1, lyUj: Ministerial directive-s r.. 1 ct the "seraitive 
zones," 2 o;i the ijTiplantation, volur^ and appearance of buildings, 
and 3 on building; in the neighborhood of najcr hi^raTS. 

31. April 15, 1961: Hinlaterial directive n. h en subdivisicns. 

32. August 2, 1961: Creaticin of the District of the Paris Region. 

33 • October 10, I96I: General Siatructions on supervision in nattert 
of urban planning and architecture. 

3h' Decree of November 30, 1961 enacting the National Urban Plarjiing 
Rogulaticns. 

35. Section h of the Lau of December 21, I96I relating to the 
recovery of increment values. 

36. February 1962: Report to the High Council of the Ministry of 
Construction on the National Territorial Plarjiing Project, 

37. llarch 15, 1962: Ministerial directive n. 5 on family d-..-el lings 
and urban planning. 

38. Decree of April 13, 1962 on the regulation of urban planning 
(coefficients of expropriation or acquisition of land for 
public purposes and of Lind utilization). 

39. Lair of /.ugust h, 1962 n. 62-903 on the restoration of prcperty 
and the safet,uarding of the historical patrincny, 

ho. Decrees of Februnr^' iLi, 1963, n. 63-122/2li, en creation of a 

National Cormission for Territorial Planning in the CorriiEsariat- 
General for the Plan and creation of a Delegaticn for Territorial 
Planning and Regional Action reporting to the Prine >tirJ^ter. 

hi. In 1963 the Directorate for Territorial Planning in the >Iinistry 
of Construction becomes the Directorate of Land Planning and 
Urban Planning. 

I42. February 23, 1963: the District of Paris presents a draft 
twelve-year program for facilities in the area. 

Ii3. Juno 10, 1963: Instructions for the preparation of urban 
planning projects. 

lii. Decrees of Torch lli, 196L relating to administrative refcm 
(institution of Regional Prefects to cc • ' 'e Goverrxtnt 
action concerning regional economic dev' -.t) and cresting 

corvnissions of regional and econcnic develcpnent. 

U5. Decree 61-171 of November 2, 1966 provided for regulations xrfiich 
required urban plans in tcwns were large infrastructures rere 
needed prior to modificaticrjs in land use. 

U6. Irv of December 16, l^eU on the building lease of urban plarjiing 
operations . 



27. CPL Exchange Bibliography i'/3U0 

ii7. Lax-r no. 65-561 of July 10, 1965s facilitated the procedures 
for ZAD by allowing the state the preemption ri^t without 
having to solicit the advise of the territorial committees. 

1;8, Law no. 66-1069 of December 31, 1966: Organized better "urban 
communities which were a more effective form of grouping local 
communities. The public persons and their boundaries are fixed 
by the State Council. The law instituted four of them. 

h9. Law no. 67-1253 of December 30, 1967: law of Land Ifenagement 
(Loi d 'orientation fonciere) it substituted the traditional 
master plans vrith tx-jo different types of plans xjhich separated 
the regulatory function from the function of equiping the land 
with facilities and infrastructxires . The two types of plans are 
the Orientation Schemes for Planning and Development (Schemes 
direct:eur8 d'amenagement et d'urbanisiiie) and Land Developraent 
Plans (Plans d' occupation des sole). 

50. Decree no. 68-1107 of December 3, 1968: specified according to 
the directives of the Law of land Management the elements ^of the 
ZAC technique (Zone of Concerted Development or Zone d'amenage- 

. ment concert e) . 

51. Decree no. 69-551 of May 28, 1969? it made SDAU (General Scheme 
of Planning and Development or Schema directeur d'amenagement et 
d'urbanisme) corrrpulsory in communities of over 50,000 in 
population. 

52. Law no. 71-588 of July 16, 1970: required the preparation in 
each department of a plan for the reincorporation and reorgani- 
zation of communes. 



23. CPL Exchange Bibltogr&I*y «!'3U0 

appdide; B 

suppleertary biblicgraphical referh?ces 

1. Selected Articles from Urb^nlsine 

I. Planning policies and instjnrsents 

Anonymous. "Ar£na{:enent du territoire," No, 69-70, 1561. 

. "Debates et controverses sur le VI Flan," ITo. 118, 1970. 

. "Expropriation pour cause d'utilite' publicue," "c. 

rpfo, 1961.^ 
. "Operations urbaines : zones a urbaniser en pncrite, 

renovation urbaine, financenent, " I'o. 69-70, 1961. 

"Le plan du 'urban is r.e : instrunent de la politique 



lonciere," No. 80, 1963. 

. "Le plans d 'urbanisme, " Ibid. 

. "Plans d'urbcnisir.€," No. 69-70, 1961. 

"Urbanismo: oreanisaticn administrative," Ibid. 



Camelot, Robert. "Region Parisienne: ZUP de Bures-Crsay, " llo. 

102-103, 1967. 
Convert, Victor. "Les problenves fincjiciers des villes," llo, 119, 

1970. ^ 
C1!ER. "La reforme de I'Etat: decentralisation dans le cadre 

regional, partecipation des forces e'ccnomicues et sociales," 

No. 115: , 1970. 
Cornicre, Paul. "Le VI Plan et laddemocratie locale," IIo. 119, 

1970. 
Gotten, Michel. "La modernisation de la genticr. des villes," 

Ibid. 
Demery, C. "Reims: ZUP Croix -Rouge, " To. 102-1C3, 1967. 
Dupont, Gerard. "Evolution de la construction et de I'urbanisae 

depuis 1950," No. 80, I963 . 
Feyte, Gerard. "Scheme directeur d» amenapement et d'urbanisrae," 

No. 115, 1970. 
Grimol, Franck. "ZUP des htinguettes , " No. 85, 196U. 

rind Renaud, Serge. "ZUP de Vernriscn," Ibid. 

Guillaume, Max. "Auxerre : TJP Sainte-Genevieve, " No. 102-103, 

/ 1967. 
Mace, Roger. "La re'forme de la ccncepticn et de la re'glenentaticn 

des plans d' urban is me," No. 85, 196U. 
llapry, Bertrand. "Zone d'am^atenent cocerte': ZAC," No. 113, 

1970. 
Novarina, y,aurice. "Annecy: ZUP de Novel," No. 102-103, 1967. 
Pep^re, Gerard. "DOCURBA: le role de I'urbaniste dans ies ZUP," 

No. 81, 1963. 
Poutout, P. "Le foncticn communale," Nc. '' '. 1970. 
Pozzi, Jean. "L'amenapement rPGicnal: r 5 d 'action, " No. 71, 

1961. 
Recorbet, Charles. "La Pianificszione territoriale in Francis,' 

Urban is tic a , >'arch 1962. 
Ribat, Jean. "La de'centralisation indus trie lie," No. 80, I963. 



29. CPL Exchange Bibliography //3U0 

Rouge, I%urice-Francois . "La loi d 'orientation fonciere et \ 

la structure de I'urbanisme, " No. 102-103, 196?. 
. "Riformes regionale et communale: e'lements d'\ine 

novelle structure d'amenagement, " No. 115, 1970. 
Tempia, Emilio. "Francia: enti locali, leggi e politiche 

urbanistiche 1965-69," Urbanistica , March 1970. 
. "Pianificazione territoriale e urbanistica in 

Francia; bilancio e prcapettive 19U6-66," Ibid ., December 1965. 
Trorial, Jacques and Hubert Perrot. "Urbanisme et structures 

administratives locales," No. 9U> 1966. 
Virgili, Lanfranco. "Zone di habitation de la Cote Sainte- 

Catherine," No. 102-103, 1967. 

II. Paris and the Paris Region '^ ' 

Anonymous. "Bassin Paris ien, " Monographic Issue, No. 96-96, I966. 

_. "Region Parisienne," No. 69-70, I96I. 

Auburtin, Jean. "Paris," No. 81^, 1961;. 

Delouvrier, Paul. "L'avenir de la ne'bulteuse parisienne," Ibid. 

Diebolt, Marcel. "Le plan d'amenagement et d 'organisation 

gene'rale de la region parisienne," No. 71, I96I. 
Fourastie, Jean. "Economie et Sociologie," No. 8ii, 1961i. 
Gravier, Jean-Francois. "Paris en France," Ibid. 
Griotteray, Alain. "Exigences du destin de Paris," Ibid. 
Ihsolera, Italo. "Aspetti e problemi del paesaggic urbano in 

Parigi," Urbanistica , December I96O. 
lolonp, Claude. "Un dossier nomme' Paris," No. 7U, 1962. 
Nungesser, Roland. "Pris de conscience regionale," No. 8)+, 196i|. 
Tempia, Emilio. "Le schema regionale di Parigi," Urbanistica , 

December 1965. 

III. Equillibrium Metropolises, Urban Hierarchy, New Toxtos 

Anonymous. "Amenagement de la region de Grenoble," No. II8, 1970. 

__. "Amenagement de la rd'gion urbaine de Lyon," Ibid. 

. "Amenagement de la region urbaine de St. Etienne," Ibid. 

. "Bibliographie s\rr les metropolis," No. 89, 1965. 

. "Experiences de villes nouvelles en France et a 

1' stranger," No. llit, I969. 
Antoine, Serge, and Ge'rard Weill. "Les metropolis d'equilibre ' 

et leur region," No. 89, 1965. 
Blouch-Laine', Francois. "Les me'tropolis d'equilibre," Ibid. 
Brenas, Jean. "Les structures administrative des grandes 

agglomerations," Ibid. 
Bonchez, Giles. "Villes nouvelles et bidonvilles , 'J No. IO6, I968. 
Carle, P. "Axe d 'urbanization nouvelle de la Vallee de la I^^rne, " 

No. Ill;, 1969. 
Frybourg, Michel. "Les transports dans les metropolis," No. 89, 

1965. 
Goldberg, S. "Ville nouvelle d'Trappes," No. lli;, 1969 . 
Hirsch, Bernard. "Pontoise-Cergy Ville nouvelle," No. 105, 1968. 
Labasso, Jean. "L'espace urbain, " No. 89, 1965. 
Lacaze, J. P. "Ville nouvelle de Vaudreuil, " No. Ill;, 1969. 
Lalande, A. "Ville nouvelle d'Evry," Ibid. 
Lefevre, J. M. "Toulouse-Le ItLrail, " Ibid. 



30. CPL Exchange BibUcyraphy ji*3U0 

Lev/in, Andre. "Carecteres critiiisux dee netrcpolcs d'equilitr*, " 

No. 89, 1565. 
Olliver, P. "La metrcpole Lycn-5t. Etiemc-Orencble et son 

schera d 'am^nagenent , " No. 118, 1970. 
Parent, Jean-Francois. "Ville Neuve de Grenoble-Echirclles , " 

Ho. 107, 1968. 
Perillat, Jacques. "Des institutions pour les netrcpcles," 

No. 89, 1965. 
Piatier, Andre'. "Les fonctions de polarisation," Ibid. 
Ralite, J. C. "Ville nouvclle de Lille-Est," Ho. Ill, 1969. 
Rossi, R. "Ville nouvolle de I'Isle d'Abeau," Ibid. 
Rouillier, J. E. "Organisation administrative et financiere 

des villes nouvelles," Ibid. 
Stem, Max. "Tendences de la politique francaise des villes 

nouvelles," Ibid. 
Trystram, Jean-Paul. "Relations sociales," Ho. 89, 1965- 

rv. Reconstruction, Housing Developments, Urban RenCTfal 

Alle'gret, Jacques. "Renovation oevre d'&quipe," No. 81, 1963. 
Anonymous. "L'experience d'un renovation urbain: Francoville, 

Seine-^-Oise," No. 88, 1965. 
. "Les diverses conceptions a I'origine d' ^m Grand 

Ensemble," No. 75-76, 1962. 

. ''Grands Ensembles: etudes et realisations," Ibid. 

'Le Grand Ensemble, facteur de progress social et de 



pr'^res humain," Ibid. 

. "Grands Enseriles: Synthese," Ibid. 

. "La partecipation des conseils de residents a la 



(.estion des grands ensembles," No. 119, 1970. 

"La vie dans les Grands Ehserbles," No. 75-76, 1962. 



Auzelle, Robert. "II problema dei quartieri antichi, " Urb-^nistica , 

July 1970. 
Lagard, Jean. "Les Grands Ensembles dense ans apres," No. 1C6, 

1968. 
Laprade, Albert. "Le re'ame'nagement des quartiers ancicns," No. 

80, 1963. 
Lopez, Raymond, and Henry Pettier. "Front de Seine I-Kenovc:- 

ticn urbaine," No. 81, I963. 
Rouge, Maurice-Francois. "Le probleme du quart ier des Halles a 

Paris," No. 102-1C3, 1967. 
Roux, Georges. "Le renovation urbaine," No. 80, 1963. 
Saillard, Michel. "Renovation et reconstruction des Villes," 

No. 81, 19t>3. 
Siatelli, Jacqueline. "Le reconstructioi: Banc d'essai de 1' 

urbnnisne," No. 80, 1963. 
Sorein, Frcnncois. "Snlvat:unrdin dei ccntri strriei urbani in 

Franc ia," Urban istica , Febni/ir}- 1965. 
Tcmpla, Emilio. "Le Halles di Farigi,/' Ibid ., y^rch 1961. 
. "II nouvo quartiere di He'rcuville Saint -Claire rel 

quadro dello sviluppo regionale," Ibid .. December l?t>5. 
Vigier, Rono. "Ia restauraticn des qucrtiers historiques , " N.-^. 

30, 1963. 



31. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

UEBMIZATION IN ITALY 

I. Patterns, Trends and Problems: Morphological Changes of Old 
Cities 

Urbanization arrived late in Italy in coitparison to France 
and other Ifestern European countries. Hotrever, because of its 
late development, urbanization in Italy has strikingly accentuated 
characteristics both in quantitative and morphological terms. In 
the first decade after WII the concentration of people in certain 
urban areas shifted in such major proportions that the nation's 
demographic distribution and the structure of most cities was 
completely changed (Gitiseppe Campos -Venuti, Amministrare 
I'Urbgnistica , Torino: Einaudi, 196?). 

The absolute population increase of three million people between 
1951 and 1961 (from ca. U7 toi ca. 50 million) was almost entirely 
in the provincial capitals, in fact 90.6^. When the 32 largest 
communes are considered they absorbed 2.8 million people. The 
grovith of the four largest cities alone — Rome, Milan, Naples, 
Turin and their provinces — represented two-thirds of the total 
increase. 

Together with this impressive phenomenon of demographic 
concentration is the Southern to Northern shift of the population 
which accentuated the country-to-city movement. Most of the 
Southern population was engaged in the agricultural econoiro?". 
Between 1951 and I96I agricultural employment in Italy dropped 
from kOfo to 29$ of the total. Most of the former agricultural 
labor became available manpower for the numerous medium and small 
industries developing in the North. Quantitatively, the characteristic 
trend in urbanization in Italy is represented by the development 
of the cities with a population of one million or over. Later 
tlian other industrialized countries, Italy developed its metro- 
politan areas during the period between 19iiO and i960. 

The average density in the city increased due to the increase 
in the number of dwelling units -a growth that was more substantial 
than the population growth itself (Campos -Venuti, 1967). Using 
1951 as the base year, the percentage increases in population and 
housing respectively for the year I96I were as follows: 

pop * hs& » 



Rome 


32^ 


79% 


Bologna 


31^ 


59% 


Turin 


k3% 


se% 


Italy 


6.5%' 


27% 



A second morphological change was caused by the accelerated 
process of industrial decentralization. Increased pressvire was 
put on outlying areas to accept industrial groiirth. The city was 
subject to functional changes forcing it to become increasingly 
oriented tot«jard tertiary activities. The earlier functional 
equilibrium within the city was rapidly projected to a metropo- 
litan scale. Before the war the large city had increased 



32. CPL Exchange BibUc6raph7 frOUO 

by expandiriE ite ncnoculr.-.r f''>rn vhile after the war the search fcr 
a nevf equilibriujn to acccmcdate this nassive grcwth vaa ncrre 
dynamic. Decentralization forces created -ew pcl:,x'iclear patterns. 
It v;as the boginnint, of the rxjtropolitan ph^se in Italy. The 
f ij^oires for Milan provide e good exaiiple of the broker, eccr.cnic 
and functional equilibrium within the city. 

In the 1951-61 decade Milan and its provincial territory 
increased by aore 650, COO or 26^. Less than h?If of this groifth, 
ill. 2%, occurred in the city >7hile the rest, 52.9^, went to the 
surrounding connunities . It may be interesting to note that by 
then the city of Milan reachfid 8.5 km. in dlaireter, an extensicn 
that London had reached at the beginning of the 19th century and 
Paris later on in that century. By then Paris (but particularly 
large cities in /mglo-Saxcn countries) had started experiencirg a 
demographic exodus which placed then in a devolopnent phase more 
complex, beyond the metropolitan phase. 

Complementary to the functional changes caused b:^- the indus- 
trial decentralization, a third change was produced by the rapid 
urbanization of Italian cities. The change was from hcaogeneity 
to heterogeneity of land uses. The original character of the city 
inherited from the past of undifferentiated land uses and coexistance 
of economic functions changed to socially and cconcnicallj'' dif- 
ferentiated and specialized patterns. Elementary manifestaticna 
of community life (living-xrorking -trading) and core ccnplex ones 
(leaming-cureing-entertaining) known altogether as "urban libertiee" 
tended to be spatially separated. Unfortunately, the mere dif- 
ferentiated such manifestaticns become the fewer the cppcrtunities 
are for all citizens to enjoy "urban freedom of choice." In fact, 
one of the consequences of economic cjid social differentiaticji is 
the creation of artificial lard value differences rrithin the city. 
Some of the abnormal aspects of urban land value increase and 
speculation in Italy will be illustrated later en. 



33. CPL Exchange Bibliography 7^^3110 

II. Reconstruction After the Var (19U5-5U) . 

A. The Southern Problem 

It has been pointed out that one of the striking things 
about post^^ra^ Italy is that it did not follow the lines of economic 
planning developed in France and elsevihere in Europe despite the 
presence of the most powerful leftist group in Western Europe. 
At first, in 19k$ it appeared that the Corairainists would press for 
a completely collectivized economy. However, their bargaining 
power within the Constituent Assembly only achieved a generic 
Article Ul in the Italian Constitution endorsing private economic 
initiative snd entrusting to the state the right to "program" — ^ 
i.e., to coordinate private and public interventions toward social 
ends (LaPalombara, 1966). It has been argued that economic planning 
was not achieved because the folloi-ring conditions, among others, 
were not present in Italy: a. independence of the planning bodies 
from the principle ministries, b. a professional staff technically 
trained, c. sufficient authority of the planning body vis -s -vis 
those ministries and other administrative agencies called upon to 
execute the plan (Biblioteca della Rivista di Economia e Storia, 
I Piani di Sviluppo in Italia dal 19hB al I960 , Milan: Giuffre, 
I960) . " 

The major issue vrorking against a unified policy of economic 
reconstruction was the lack of reform in the public administration. 
Thus, the call for planning became translated into various initiatives, 
generally emergency responses to pressing problems. In this per- 
spective the planned intervention in the South represents the most 
irportant effort in the area of sub-national economic plajining in 
postwar Italy. Soon after the unification of Italy in i860 it 
became apparent that the South represented a special problem. 
"The Southern Question" became one of the constant topics of 
political debate. Notwithstanding certain measures taken over 
a period of time, the gap between North and South kept ^^ridening. 
At the end of TMII with the country's national wealth reduced by 
nearly one-third, rising inflation, and xd.despread unemployment, 
extreme political restiveness arose particularly in the South. 
The situation was momentarily solved by the elections of 19U8 and 
the promises made then by government leaders. 

A Southern policy was adopted in the form of the Fund for 
Extraordinary Works of Public Interest or Fund for the South. 
The policy presented ujiique aspects. It x^as a ten-year planning 
formulation. It authorized cross-and-multi-sectorial intervention 
by the Fund, thus bypassing the national bureaucracy. By creating 
a centralized a£,ency for all interventions in the South, it had 
considerable and unique f inane is 1 flexibility (LaPalombra, 1966). 
At first the Fund vias to concentrate on the creation of infra- 
structures since direct intervention in favor of industrialization 
projects was rejected. In fact, SS,h% of the Fund's budget was for 
agriculture! 30/b for acqueducts, roads and tourismj 12% for 
financing small enterprises! and only 2.6^ for vocational schools 
and other social programs (Mario Belotti, "The Development of the 
Italian South," Ekistiks, May 1967). The revisions to the 



3ii. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

le£lalaticn of the Fund in 19^7 and 1962 expanded the scope of the 
activities of the Ftind to the point where one can speak of "global 
planning" even il only on a geographically United scale. The Fund 
Mas authorized to bo ccncemed, ancng other things, vith the workers' 
housing, hospital and health care facilities and airport planning, 
as well as other major aspects of planning. 

B. Multiple Intervention in Hcusing: balkanization of PrograaB 

The housing shortage at tho end of the war was at least as 
bad in Italy as it vas in France. Actually, the damage to Horthem 
Italian cities had been even r.ore pervasive due to the longer 
period of bonbing by allied forces and the duration of the 
battle lines. In the irmediate post-war period, hcoising becane 
one of the sharply debated political issues. Strong support for 
direct governirent intervention was offered by different forces in 
the political spectrum. The debate on the naticn-vride housing 
problem was linked to the debate on economic reccnstr\icticn and 
development (LaPalombara, 1S^66) . Massive "popular housing" 
(social housing in French terminoloer) ccnstructicn was proposed and 
endorsed as a way to relieve unemployment (ILO, European Regional 
Conference: Report of the Director General , Geneva: ILO, 155U) . 
It was also ccnsidored to be a valid eccnonic incentive for 
development as well as housing people who vere in no condition to 
provide decent housing for themselves, (Giuseppe Samore, 
L'Urbanistica e I'awcnire delle citta , Eari: Laterza, I960). 

As in FVance, other factors in addition to war damages vere 
responsible for the housing shortage. They included extensive 
demolition, absolescence, deterioration caused by rent ccntrcls, 
high birth rates, and, soon after, rapid income and urban population 
increases. Ihe 19$1 census showed a ratio of 2lil d>?ellings per 
1,000 people vrhich compared very poorly ^d.th other Vestem European 
countries. Unlike France, Italy adqjted no national econcnic 
plan. However because of its potential for unemployment and 
economic development, direct state intervention in housing vas 
politically viable and several programs were adopted over tine 
and entrusted to different governmental bcxiies. 

Three governmental departments vrere given authority ever 
housing programs: the :Linistry of Public V.'orks , the Ministry of 
Labor and Social VJe If are, and the Ministry of the Treasury. The 
tradition of mutual exc lus iveness in public ^ -^ traticn (e^ich 
ministry is jealous of its own prerogatives) . red the possibility 

of coordination among the programs sponsored by each of the three 
ministries. For the same reason the interninisterial cor: " 
CEP or Popular Housing Committee, established in 1956 to ; o 

coordination achieved very little. 

The Ministry of Public Vcrks was to approve state assistance 
programs for popular, or non-luxury, housing. It also was to 
provide an annual contribution of U> of the cost of such housing 
developments for 35 years to their sponsors: UJCIS (national 
institute for the construction of housing for st«te erplcy^es), lACF 
(autonomous ref,ional institutes for popular housing), housing 
cooperatives of government and other workers, and conmines. The 



35. GPL Exchange Bibliography #3U0 

Ministry of Public Works also participated in direct housing 
production because it had the responsibility of providing housing 
for incapacitated war veterans, refugees, and for slum clearance. 

The Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare vras to administer 
the INA-CASA, the major state housing construction program. The 
program was to be financed by a payroll tax of 0.6/b levied upon 
employees and matched by ±,2% by enployers and by h'3>% of the total 
by the Ministry of the Treasiiry. First priority for housing 
under the INA-CASA program x^as reserved to families living in 
unacceptable housing. 

The volume of housing construction in Italy for the imme- 
diate post-war period was close to that of France. The volume 
in either country was far belov; that of W. Germany. The figures 
for 19ii8+53 x\rere the f ollol;^ring for the three countries (the figures 
are in thovisands, the first gives the annual total construction and 
the second the ratio per 1,000 inhabitants: 





Italy 


France 


¥^ 


Germany 


19h8 


37 


0.8 


i;0 


1.0 


150 


n.a 


19h9 


16 


1.0 


51 


1.3 


215 


U.5 


1950 


Ih 


1.6 


70 


1.7 


360 


7.5 


1951 


93 


2.0 


76 


1.8 


Uio 


3.5 


1952 


117 


2.5 


83 


2.0 


k\xi 


9.1 


1953 


150 


3.2 


115 


2.7 


51U 


10.5 



(Marnata, 1970) 

The multiplication of housing construction programs i^as paral- 
leled by the multiplication of housing financing programs. In turn, 
both sets of programs created their own independent and official 
bureaucracies. The Cassa Depositi e Prestiti, a intra -governmental 
bank and lending agency of the Ministry of the Treasury, provided 
mortgage financing assistance in the form of 50 year mortgage 
loans to cooperatives of public enployees and to public agencies 
and non-profit groups sponsoring 'popular housing." The interest 
rate was to be fixed annually by the Ministry of Finajice. In addi- 
tion, the Ministry of Public Works was to pay k% of project costs 
to public agencies and cooperatives. A second lending agency, 
the Fondo per Increment© Edilizio, was set up in 1950 with U. S. 
funds but has as its goal the financing of privately oimed houses. 
The Fund was never of any importance because of the limited amount 
of resources at its disposal. Lfejor housing finances came from a 
third source: thirteen institutes and land credit sections of 
banks extended 10-15 year private land credit and 25 year building 
credit. They were financed by the sale of bonds regulated by the 
ffinistry of the Treasury. They also could provide loans for 
dwelling construction generally covering up to 75^ of land and 
building value at a 1% interest rate. Public sources were estima- 
ted to represent 37^ of total housing construction investments 



36. CPL Exchange Bibliography #3U) 

In 1S50 and 25a in 19514 (P . F . V.'endt, "Post-V/ar U HouBing Policies 
in Italy, " Land Econcnlcs , Hay 1962) . The percentage spent in Italy 
vras nuch smaller than the one spent in Franoe. Ccrpared with 
France and Uest Germany, Italy relied heavily on privately constructed 
and cvmed hcusin^, despite the political endcrsenent of the housing 
issue by nest parties. Ihe explanation for the apparent conflict 
probably remains v:ith the lack of coordination of efforts, the 
bureaucratic slo^z-dcxm, and costs that were built into the 
piecemeal approach to the housing problem. Finally, with the Act 
of July 2, 19h9 a tax exenption policy was adopted which gave a 
25 year tax exemption for non-luxury housing, en land and develc^- 
ment costs, and portions of mortgage taxes. However, since the 
Act also included tax exemption on building materials it encouraged 
large-scale private development by large corporations and larxi and 
housing speculation, particularly in urban areas. 

C. Planning Legislation and Instruments: The Passive Planning 
Deadlock 

At the end of the war, there v;ere striking similarities between 
France and Italy in terms of planning at local levels of operation. 
In 19115 there was yet no regional planning mechanism in France. 
Immediately after, in both Italy and France the state and the 
communes were given planning responsibilities. Hn-rever, it was the 
content and ran^e of state planning responsibilities that identified 
the first relevant difference between planning in France and Italy. 
French state planning carie into being through various forms of state 
legislation, adninistrative and planning staffs and adoptioi of 
economic policies and programs while in Italy there was no endorse- 
ment of state planning other than in the form of the oilti-refeicnal 
intervention in the South sponsored by the state. In viei* cf this 
first difference planning at the communal level was bound to assune 
increasingly different characteristics in the t\io countries. 

In France communal planning was soon to have a range of com- 
pletcness within the national-regional frameifork. In Ital^' 
planning at the communal level would remain strictly phj-sical 
planning and would tend to keep a basically local view ("Dctcnico 
Rodella, Planning Abroad: Italy," Ta-rn and Countr>- Flanninc , 
November 1965) . " 

The Urban Planning Act of AUt^ist 17, 191^2 had no provision 
for national planning. It envisioned pLinning at the local level 
ss a passive rather than as an active process. The legislation 
simply provided for plans which contained constraints on the use 
of the land but which had no provisions for the setting of priorities. 
Spatial planning before the 19li2 Act had been restricted tc the 
designing and building of development plans (general site planning 
in American terms and detailed plans using French terninclctT^. 
It was innovative in broadening the scale and sccpe of plarjiing. 
Planning nwr had to invest the whole comimmal territory which 
included urban as well as rural areas. Technicall}' this shift 
in scale was achieved by differentiating the general connunal 
plan from the detailed plan. The former was basically a scning 



37. CPL Exchange Bibliography ,^3U0 

plan indicating the major directions of physical development while 
the latter consisted of very detailed site planning to the point of 
indicating the volume of the buildings. The provisions of the 
Act to expand the plan to the uhole communal area was, haiever, 
an easy administrative solution to the conceptual need of in- 
tegrating the planning of tarns x^ith the planning of their hinter- 
land. Communes are in fact the elementary political-administra- 
tive cells of the Italian state. Such solutions highlighted 
immediately the major shortcomings of the Act. 

There were a variety of unique characteristics that varied from 
city to city that were not taken into consideration. For example, 
there were: a. communes x^rith very large territorial dimensions 
(Rome made up of 152,000 hect . and Ravenna of 66 hect.) but with 
very concentrated populations, b, communes of small dimensions 
(Mian, Genoa, Turin) but very densily populated and urbanized, 
c. communes of middle size in both demographic and spatial forms 
(their urban centers often surrounded by a series of small settle- 
ments in a radial pattern), d. communes of small dimensions in both 
demographic and spatial terms (whenever they sxarounded communes 
more densely populated and industrialized a problem developed of 
fiinctional interrelationships). Notwithstanding these diversities, 
de jure and de facto communes perform the same governmental and 
planning functions which include, for example, budget planning for 
schools, welfare, transportation, local taxes, housing, trade, 
sewer and pot^rer lines, sport and theater facilities. The commune 
had the responsibility for preparing both the general plan x-jhich 
x-rould take into accoxint the spati;;! needs of the elements above and 
the detailed plans to be used in the inplementation of the general 
plan. Actually, since the application procedures (regelamento 
d'applicazione) for the 19U2 Act were never prepared by Parliament, 
the implementation phase of communal plans x-ras subject to challenges 
x-rhich often voided the pxarpose and coitent of the plan. The 
application procedures trere essential for facilitating the imple- 
mentation of any act under the statutory law system xjhich applies 
in Italy. Consequently, the lack of such procedures forced communes 
to absorb the entire financial burden for implementing detailed plans. 
The commune had to provide the infrastructures for private development 
as well as bxaying land for public facilities and service on the 
market at practically market prices. 

Given the economic ccnditicns of Italian communes xrhich have 
virtually no substantial taxing power, their use of detailed plans 
as instruments to inplement the general plan was financially im- 
possible. Thus, the initiative to inclement the general plan 
shifted to the private sector, and (quite ccaitrary to the sxibstan- 
tive content of the 19l;2 Act) the interpretation of the courts 
supported this trend. Private developers were recognized as 
having the right to develop areas zoned by the general plan in 
absence of detailed plans by the communes. In reality, private 
development plans x-rere given the freedom to develop areas and to 
impose the burden of providing services and infrastructxires on the 
finances of the public. Clearly, both the contradictions in the 
19h2 Act and the lack of adequate interpretation by the courts and 



33. CPL Zxchian£e Bitlioyaphy i^3U0 

tho lack of applicaticn prccedures by Parlianent made plamine, 
at the local level pcworless before private speculaticn. Kcreovcr, 
in a fcT7 years it brought ccminunes to the state of bankruptcy in 
their efforts to "passively" respond to the boordng develq:rfint 
caused by rapid urbanization 'rith nininal infrastructures and 
facilities (Campos -Venuti, 1967). 

The courts in their interpretation of the Act took on extre- 
mely conservative position in favor of private developers. For 
example, it made it iiqpcssible for ccnraones to take advantage of 
Article 18 ^rhich contained expropriation measures linited to the 
acquisition of land for public facilities, \7hile the Act stated 
that the price of such land uould be at levels before the pre- 
paration of the general plan (and therefore at values closer to 
the price as agricultural land), the courts inpcsed the inter- 
pretation that agricultural land close to built-up areas was to te 
considered residential larxi. The expropriation of such land carried 
high prices vrhich in most cases comrxines cculd not affcrd. The 
entire implementation mechanism set up by the 19h2 Act proved to 
be totally inadequate. In addition, the rigid and highly centralized 
review process of the general plans through the provincial prefects 
and the ilinistry of Public VJorks caused frustrating procedural adjust- 
ments vhich made plans increasingly out-of-date and unrelated 
to ongoing developments (C. R. Mocine, "The Hew Plan for Rone," 
J .A. I. P ., Moveirber 1959). 

To explain in p.-rt the trends sanctioned by the courts one 
ought to consider the nature of the postn-rar reconstruction which 
tras regulatpd by the Varch 1, 19U5 decree and modified by the 
October 27, 1951 Act. Such plans provided for rebuilding areas 
damaged or wiped out by the vrar, often the central parts of the 
to^m. They were to be prepared on the basis of and be consistent 
irith the general plan of the tCT^m. In the absence of the general 
plan, they vrere to be prepared on the basis of the 191a2 urban 
planning act. The availability of large state funds for re- 
construction, the connection with the Incentives given to the 
building industry to absorb unemployTnent, and the >reakness of 
municipnl governments due to the inherent ccntrsdicticns cf the 
I9U2 Act were the three major factors which spurred nassive 
speculative redevelopment of the central cities (Samona, 1?60). 



39. CPL Exchange Bibliography ,f3U0 

III. The Emergence of Regional Approaches: Intercoinrrrunal 
Planning in Italy 

By the middle 1950 's it was clear that the clavises of the 
19142 urban legislation calling for local planning xirere enipty 
words for Italian cities. Ihe almost total ignorance of the law 
was due to two causes: 1. the contradictory provisions of the 
law made a clear understanding difficult and 2. the reviex-r mech- 
anism for local pls.ns was slow, costly, and lacked incentives to 
promote the development of local planning initiatives. The decree 
of 19Sh which initiated the national campaign for local planning 
made compulsory the preparation of a master plan by those 
communes Xirhich appeared on the list compiled by the Ministry of 
Public Works (Samona, I960), However, under the pressures of rapid 
and chaotic urbanization a number of large cities soon started 
considering planning hypotheses and solutions iirhich could go 
beyond the boundaries of the city's master plan. The legal 
opportunity was provided by Article 12 of the I9I42 lavr XThich pro- 
vided for the institution of interc ommunal planning groups on a 
voluntary basis. Such groupings could include a major city and 
the belt of communes which xjere becoming totally interdependent 
in their physical, economic, and demographic grcvrth processes 
(Carapos-Venuti, 1967). Milan, Turin, Rome, Bologona, and Florence 
were the first large cities to initiate studies of the rapid 
grci'Tth of peripheral areas and of the possible alternatives in 
intercominunal plans. These later were to be prepared in collabora- 
tion xrith the representatives of the surrounding communities. 
Intercominunal planning in medium-sized cities was undertaken at 
the beginning of the 1960's. 

Intercommunal planning efforts xirere to face serious problems 
largely due to inappropriate iirplementation measures and financial 
tools provided by the laxT. The major problem that intercommunal 
planning had to solve uas institutional in nature. The 19li2 lax-r 
gave the responsibility of the preparation of the plan to the 
large cities, but it did not regulate the participation of the 
smaller communes in the planning process (Domenico Rodella, 
Legge Urbanistica , Mian: Pirola, 1971). In the examples of 
Milan, Turin and Rome x-rhere plans xjere developed without the 
institutionalization of the role of the smaller communes, the plans 
resulted politically unfeasible in their implementation phase. 
In fact, the law which recognized the leadership role of the large 
cities "Ji preparing the area-wide plans did not supply them xidth 
any adequate implementation mechanism just as it did not provide for 
£in adequate participation by the smaller groups . 

In the absence of an area-xride political administrative body 
to coordinate local planning within the intercommunal planning 
framework, most intercommunal planning efforts xirere doomed 
to failure or only a partial achievement. Hoxrever, tx-jo interesting 
xirban development proposals xjere debated and tried out in connection 
with the preparation of a number of intercommunal plans. One xras 



iiO. C?L Exchajice Bibliography #3U0 

the proposal to create outlying business districts (centri dixezicnali) 
to encourage the decentralization cf eccnonic activities. The 
historical center, hcrever, iras to remain the center of the city. 
The proposal for the nevr bijslness districts expressed the yrcving 
concern fcr relieving the cities of eccnonic and physical conges- 
tion. The prcpcsals were: 1. integrate the city to its hinter- 
land and 2. roaffirn the assurrticn of the corplenentary relation- 
ship between hictorical center and business center. The proposal for 
the nev; b\isiness districts did not approach the ne>r town concept 
of Anglo-AjTierican experience (Ccrvrin I-Jocine, "Ilew Business Centers 
and Italian Cities," JAIP. August 1965). 

A second proposal which vras adopted in several interxjonnunal 
plans (Rome, Bologna and Milan) was the concept of "organic districts'' 
(quartieri organic i), (Gianpaolo Andreatta, Pianif icazicne e nuovl 
centri direzionali , Padov: 'larsilio, 1968). The aim cf the nev; 
ccnccpt was to g\iide peripheral growth through planned, large-scale 
development. It V7as characterized by harr.cnious architectural pat- 
terns, a mixture of land uses, and the provision of services in 
residential centers (Rodella, 1965). Both of the two plarining 
concepts expressed the necessity of finding solutions to the chaotic 
and costly congestion of urban areas. They were cultural proposals 
developed by study groups interested in planning. 

In the absence of national involvenient in the decentralization 
of large cities and -urban grarth policies, such concepts have been 
applied within the existing legislative franevrork— i.e., the 
communal and intercominunal plans. In the l?60's there was an 
extensive debate on national urban gra-rth policies by professional 
and political organizations, but the govemnent was never able to 
provide an official political response to the exigencies and 
suggestions expressed in the country' (LaPaloni)ara, 1966) . 



lil. CPL Exchange Bibliography jl3hO 

IV. Urban Development Policies; Economic Programming and 
Territorial Policies 

In 1965 Italy adopted its First National Economic Plan (C. R. 
Mocine, "Urban Groxrth and a Neiir Planning Law in Italy," Land 
Ec enemies , November 1965) • The step was more important as a 
demonstrative effort rather than as an expolicit program for 
implementation. The ruling political coalition — i.e., government — 
demonstrated the political will to face for the first time the 
problems of economic development from a national perspective. In 
implementation the defects of the Plan x^ere most evident in the 
fields of urban policies and competent administrative mechanisms . 

The directives of the Plan were limited to aspects of physical 
and economic development which were outlined only on a regional and 
national level. The local dimension was absent. The Plan aimed 
at the reduction of the inbalances among national regions and an 
increase in national facilities and services (Vernon Newcombe, 
"Creating an Industrial Development Pole in Southern Italy, " 
Journal of the Town Planning Institute , April 19^9) . 

The Plan also lacked the appropriate multi-level political — 
administrative framerrork needed to transform policy statements into 
working programs. IJhen the Plan was first introduced, Italy had 
an administrative structure that functioned on two levels: national 
and local. The connecting strand was the provincial administrations 
under control of the provincial prefect appointed from Rome. The 
regional level of government as provided by the Constitution and 
implicit in the Plan was still to be instituted. In I966 Regional 
Planning Committees (Comitati Regionali per la Programmazione) xirere 
created. They were very helpful in relaunching the necessity of 
regional governments. The initiative xiras finally consumated in 
1970 x-jhen regional elections helped to create regional administra- 
tions in 19 regions of the country. According to the Constitution, 
these regions enjoy a large degree of autonomy in matters concerning 
economic development. 

In 1970 the I'linistry of the Budget and Economic Planning 
proposed a Second National Economic Plan for the period 1971-75 
(Piano 80), (llinistero del Bilancio e della Programmazione 
Economica, Piano 80 , Florence: Sansoni, 1970). Piano 80 presents 
interesting nev; aspects in national planning in Italy. The in- 
novations X'jere: 1. the inclusion of the urban as x^ell as the 
territorial dimensicnj 2. opening the debate on the bankruptcy 
of local governments due to their efforts to guide development 
vjhile lacking adequate measures and resources] 3» definition 
of economic development at all levels x^ithin a broader framexrork 
X'^hich includes environmental, cultural, educational, conservation, 
social, and political components! U. control of urban development 
for cities which x^ould have over one million inhabitants by 1?60. 
Piano 80 is undoubtedly a step ahead vis-e-vis the First National 
Plan. Its implementation is, however, in doubt. 



h2. CPL Exchange Bibliographj OUO 

Itnly: Lcx.islativG G'-irTary 

1. Law no. 1150 of Auguat 17, 19h2: Urban Planning Lsai which 
instituted communal site and intercornmnal planning. 

2. Decree no. l51i of March 1, 19li5: instituted reconstruct icn 
plans fcr war-damaged cities. 

3. Law no. 83li of July 28, 1950: ratified 19U5 decree and reccgnized 
the Ministry of Public !Torks as having inpcrtant powers to grant 
cormunes the rij^t of exprcpriaticn of land in ccrxection vith 
the reconstruction and/or constructions within a reconstruction 
plan. 

h' Lavr no. 1902 of November 1, 1952: provided fcr protective 
measures against private development. 

5. Circular no. 2^95 of July 7, 195U of the J-Iinistry of Public 
Uorks : instructions for the preparation of ccwainal master 
plans and site plans and the designation of a nurioer of 
communes that had to prepare plans imediately. 

6. Law no, 259 of March 21, 1958: grant for the conservation and 
renCTral of cave-like quarters of Macerata known as "I Ssssi." 

7. Decree no. I637 of February 2, 1959: instituted the creation 
of an intercommunal plan for Milan. 

8. Law no. lUU of March 20, 1959: modified article 17 of the 
195U Circular by re-extending to five years the tine linit 
for the preparation of communal plans fcr the cities listed in 
the Circular. 

9. Decree no. 3Uo5 of July 15, 1959= instituted the preparation 
of an intercommunal plan for Padoa. 

10. Law no. 617 of July 21, 1959: instituted the Ministry of 
Tourism and Spectacles and gave it authority in the plaming 
in communes of health spas and tourist centers. Such pcTtrer 
previously belonged to the Ministry of Interior. 

11. Circular no. 2356 of March 9, 1961: set up criteria and 
directives for the preparation of territorial plans of 
industrial developed areas and industrialisation poles. 

12. Law no. 167 of April 18, 19t2 : facilitated land acquisiticr 
for subsidized and public housing on behalf of the ccmunes and 
public development corporations. 

13. Law no. 2U6 of March 5, 19^3: gave the ccnrunes the pnrrr to 
le\y a tax on land value increases. The tax iras corj-uifory for 
comnunes of over 30,000 in population. 



k3' GPL Exchange Bibliography //3U0 

Ih. Decree of September 22, I96I1: instituted in every region a 
regioial coimnittee for economic programming. 

T 

15. Law no. 90k of July 21, 1965: facilitated expropriation 
procedures for the purposes provided in the Law I67. 

16. LaxT no. 765 of August 6, 1967s the so called "bridge law" 
which provided financial subsidies to communes in planning 
and building projects, 

17. Constitutional Court Decision no. S$ of August 28, I968: 
declared unconstitutional articles 7 and kO of the 19U2 Urban 
Planning Law x\rhere the articles limited the private OT-mer's 
right to build without specifying a time limit and whenever the 
limitation was recognized to be expropriative in character. 

18. Law no. II87 of November 19, 1968: modified the 19li2 Urban 
Planning Law according to the Constitutional Court Decision 
no. $$. 

19. Law no. 291 of June 1, 1971: facilitated procedures for 
planning and public works projects. Also, it provided for 
incentives in housing constructions. 

20. Law of October 21, 1971 (Housing Act): measures for the expro- 
priation of private land for housing construction in situations 
of public need. Modified the 19Sh Urban Planning law and Law 
no. 167 on subsidized public housing. Instituted Housing 
Committee (CER) and authorized larger investments on behalf 

of the state for subsidized and public housing. 



hh. CPL Exchange Bibliography OU) 

Selected Articles fron Urban istics 

I. The Debate on llatioial and Rcgicnal Planning 

Anonymoua. "Dagli statuti rcgicnali: Straloi relative alia 

irateria urbanistica, " J-Iarch 1971. 
Archibugi, Franco. "L'assetto territcriale nella proyrarriazicne 

eccnonica," I'arch 1967. 
Astengo, Giovanni. "Verso xinal nuova Icgislazicne urbanistica: 

iirpcstazione e caratteristiche della proposta dell'EIU," 

April 1961. 
Borechio, Vittorio. "L'esperienza della pianificazicne regicnale 

in Italia," September 1969. 
Centro Studi e Piani Economic i. "Progetto '90— Proiezioni 

territorial!," Ilarch 1971. 
Cobianca, Vincenzo, and Alberto Lacava. "Ipotezi di assetto 

territoriale a livello nazionale: llezzogiomo, " '/-arch 1967. 
Conrdssicne IIFJ. "Proposta di legge generale per la pianifi- 
cazicne urbanistica," April 1961. 
Conpagna, Francesco. "I progranmi d'intervente dello State e la 

pianificazicne regionale," September 1969. 
Lonbardi, Gior§,io. "Delia pianificazicne interccnnunale alia 

pianificazicne conprensorialo : profili giuridici 

e emninistrativi, " October 1967. 

. "La pianificazicne territoriale regicnale," October 1967. 

Moroni, Piere, and Guisa Marcialis-Samona. "Ipotesi di assetto 

territoriale e livello nazicnale: centro-nord, " March 1967. 
Radogue, Paolo. "Sviluppo industriale e programnazicne territoriale 

nel mezzogiomo, ' December 1965. 
Tutino, Alessandro. "La diffusicne territoriale delle aree 

metropolitane in relazione alia dimensions regicnale," 

September 1969 . 
Vittorini, Karcello. "Indirizzi strategic! di asetto territcriale 

per I'inquadramcnto dei programni di intervente nel 

Mezzogiomo, " March 1971. 

II. Urban Land Value Increases and the Hoxising Problem 

Achilli, Michele. "La lunga battaglia per la casa," October 1971. 
Assoc iasione Nazionale Comuni Italian! sesione Erdlie-Ronag^. 

"Atti del Convcgno sul Ccntrollo pubblicc del territcrio 

per unalpolitica della casa e dei servizi," Bologna 13-Ui 

febbraio, 1970, March 1970. 
Giovenale, Fabrizio. "Forma urbana : gl! interventi d! edilizia 

sowenzicnata, " Deceirber I960. 
INU. "Atti del Convcgno Mazicnale: Folitica della casa e 

politica del territorio: Ic ccntraddiaicni dclle leggi 

approvate e proposte, Room 25 luglio 1971," October 1971. 

. "Documento sulla politica della casa," yarch 1971. 

Lombardini, Siro. "La ncrraaliicaziene dei ncrcati delle aree 

e degli alloggi attravcsrs la nouva legge urbanistica," 

March I963. 



ii5. CPL Exchange Bibliography //3i40 

Martuscelli, Ilichele. "La legge ponte: significato del 

operativita, " October 196?. 
Mnistero LL.P.P. "Indagine sulle licenze edilizie rilasciati 

tra il 1-9-67 e il 31-8-68," I^Iarch 1970, 
Quaroni, Ludovico. "L'abitazione per la famiglie a basso reddito 

in Italia," July I960. 
Ripamonti, Gamillo. "La finalita della 167," i-ferch 1970. 

III. The Conservation of Historical Centers and Urban Renevral 

iinonymous. "Leggi vigenti e disegni di legge sulla salvaguardia 

e il risanamento dei centri storici," December I960. 
Badano, Gaetano. "Aspetti technico-amministrativi e finanziari, " 

December I960. 
Cederna, Antonio. "Grientamenti critici sulla salvaguadia dei 

centri storici," December I960. 
Reiner, B. F, "II riimovamento urbano, " March 1962. 
Samoria, Giuseppe. "I centri storici delle citta italiane; 

ricostruzioni, proposte e piani di risanamento 

ccnservativo," March 1962, 



COUNCIL OF PLAI-IJING LIBRARIANS SEchange Bibliography //3U0 

URBANIZATION IN FRANCE M'D ITALY 

Additional copies available from: 

Council of Planning Librarians 
Post Office Box 229 
Monticello, Illinois, 618^6 

for $1^.50. 



■:..-::m^^^msi